CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ7848295
Regular
Apr 10, 2012

RAMONA BURTON vs. LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal and dismissed reconsideration of a WCJ's order. The WCJ had improperly taken the case off calendar and allowed discovery to reopen for a new psychiatric injury claim, despite the applicant filing a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed indicating trial readiness. This prejudiced the defendant by allowing the applicant to develop evidence for an unclaimed injury after discovery closure. The Board ordered discovery closed as of the original Mandatory Settlement Conference date and returned the case to trial level for a new MSC to prepare for trial.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedInjury to PsychePanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorPermanent and Stationary StatusReopened DiscoveryClosure of DiscoveryInterlocutory Orders
References
Case No. ADJ3301539 (LBO 0315336)
Regular
Mar 21, 2017

TERESA ZAMUDIO vs. STARCO ENTERPRISES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the discovery order compelling a home care assessment was not a final order. However, the WCAB granted the applicant's Petition for Removal to amend the discovery order. Specifically, the WCAB rescinded the portion allowing the defendant's attorney to be present during the in-home assessment, finding no legal or equitable basis for it and that it could irreparably harm the applicant's privacy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalHome Care AssessmentRight to PrivacyConstitutional RightsInterlocutory OrdersDiscovery OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive Rights
References
Case No. ADJ1950726 (MON 0361748), ADJ6963803, ADJ7198723
Regular
Mar 20, 2012

DANA BURREL vs. LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

In three workers' compensation cases, the applicant sustained industrial injuries to her upper extremities on May 21, 2006, March 11, 2008, and July 28, 2008. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the application of Labor Code section 4658(d)(2), which mandates a 15% increase in permanent disability payments when an employer fails to offer suitable work within 60 days of an injury becoming permanent and stationary. The employer stipulated to providing some medical treatment and returning the applicant to work, but failed to offer regular, modified, or alternative work for 12 months post-injury. The Board found the employer's contention of denial unsubstantiated by evidence and, following *Bontempo v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.*, ruled that the 15% increase applies to all three cases.

Labor Code section 4658(d)(2)permanent disability increaseindustrial injuryright upper extremityright handright wristright shoulderright armleft wristleft hand
References
Case No. ADJ19527341
Regular
May 05, 2025

MARIA RAMIREZ vs. ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Applicant Maria Ramirez sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge's order, which found no industrial injury. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's decision, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board determined that the WCJ's credibility finding, based on the delayed worsening of symptoms, required expert medical opinion to ascertain consistency with the claimed injury mechanism, thus necessitating further development of the medical and factual record.

ADJ19527341Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryRight Arm InjuryRight Wrist InjuryRight Hip InjuryRight Leg InjuryRight Foot InjuryWCJ Credibility Determination
References
Case No. ADJ1498961
Regular
Sep 23, 2010

DALE ARNOLD vs. RALPH'S AKA KROGER

This case involves an applicant's claim for workers' compensation benefits for a right shoulder injury. While the initial award recognized industrial injury to the applicant's left shoulder, right elbow, and right forearm, the defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the right shoulder injury was not work-related. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof for the right shoulder injury. They disagreed with the primary treating physician's opinion and found the agreed medical evaluator's opinion more persuasive, ultimately reversing the finding for the right shoulder.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardCumulative TraumaIndustrial InjuryLeft ShoulderRight ElbowRight ForearmRight ShoulderPrimary Treating Physician
References
Case No. ADJ9210498
Regular
Apr 04, 2017

ELEANOR DEFRANCO vs. MONTEREY FISH COMPANY, ENSTAR (US) INC., dba ENSTAR ADMINISTRATORS FOR SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award that found industrial injury to applicant's right ankle, right shoulder, and back, but not her right knee. The WCAB rescinded the finding of industrial injury to the back, while otherwise affirming the prior decision. Specifically, the WCAB affirmed the finding that the applicant sustained industrial injury to her right ankle and right shoulder, and that medical treatment for her right knee is compensable to relieve the effects of the industrial injuries. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's reasoning for these decisions, including the application of the *Braewood* principle for treating the non-industrial knee condition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEleanor DefrancoMonterey Fish CompanyEnstarSeabright Insurance CompanyIndustrial InjuryRight AnkleRight ShoulderRight KneeBack Injury
References
Case No. ADJ119309 (OAK 0332713) ADJ1352097 (OAK 332714)
Regular
Aug 09, 2011

KEN LAWHN vs. FARMERS INSURANCE, HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's order compelling a neuropsychological evaluation. The Board determined the WCJ's order was an interim discovery ruling, not a final decision on substantive rights, making it ineligible for reconsideration. The applicant's petition for removal was also denied, adopting the WCJ's reasoning for the original order. The applicant had argued the evaluation was an invasion of privacy and unnecessary as neuropsychological health was not at issue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNeuropsychological QME evaluationNon-industrial closed head injuryOpen labor marketPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and OrderDiscovery orderInterim orderSubstantive rights
References
Case No. ADJ6656180
Regular
Aug 24, 2009

LEONARD REASON vs. MCNEAR BRICK & BLOCK, CIGA for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION, in liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted CIGA's petition for removal, reversing a prior WCJ order that denied CIGA's objection to the applicant's Declaration of Readiness to Proceed. The Board found that the WCJ erred by preventing CIGA from conducting discovery and obtaining a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) exam, despite the applicant filing his claim nearly eleven years after the alleged injury. The Board emphasized that CIGA has a right to discovery, even after denying a claim, and that any potential violation of administrative rules does not automatically waive these discovery rights. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, allowing CIGA the opportunity to complete its discovery.

CIGAPetition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedObjection to Declaration of ReadinessDue ProcessDiscovery RightsRescinded OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial Injury
References
Showing 1-10 of 3,321 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

ยฉ 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational