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. ADJ2969972 (LAO 0870854)
Regular
Apr 29, 2011

LEONARD ORTIZ vs. CITY OF WEST COVINA, HAZELRIGG RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a dispute over a workers' compensation settlement agreement (Compromise and Release or C&R). The defendant seeks to reinstate an order approving a C&R after the administrative law judge (WCJ) rescinded it due to a mathematical discrepancy on page six, creating an apparent clerical error. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's order of rescission, and returned the case to the trial level. This action was based on the procedural due process requirement of a hearing before setting aside an order approving a settlement, regardless of the substantive discrepancy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Rescinding Order Approving Compromise and ReleaseCompromise and Release agreementclerical errorpermanent disability advancesattorneys' feestypographical errorEAMS system
References
Case No. ADJ3395089 (STK 0177203)
Regular
Mar 20, 2009

ROBERT MILLER vs. CAROL-CARTER DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a monetary sanction proposed against attorney Michael Linn by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Linn objected to the sanction, claiming he was denied due process due to a discrepancy in the service date of the WCAB's Notice of Intention. While the Notice stated a February 13, 2009 service date, Linn's evidence indicated actual service on February 17, 2009. Despite this, the WCAB acknowledges the discrepancy but notes Linn's objection was timely based on the actual service date. Consequently, the WCAB grants Linn an additional five days to file further objections.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMonetary SanctionsMichael LinnEsq.Notice of IntentionGood CauseDue ProcessRequisite NoticeObjectionsTimely Response
References
Case No. ADJ7908593
Regular
Mar 19, 2012

LA WANNA MONTGOMERY vs. REACH LEARNING ACADEMY CENTER, SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address a discrepancy in the applicant's average weekly wage and temporary disability rate. The defendant challenged the WCJ's calculation, highlighting a significant difference between the applicant's tax return and evidence presented at trial. The Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the case for further proceedings to resolve this discrepancy, which impacts the applicant's credibility. The WCJ must have the applicant explain the differing earnings figures.

Average Weekly WageTemporary Disability RateEarnings DiscrepancyFederal Tax ReturnW-2s1099sApplicant CredibilityIndustrial InjuryFibula FractureCEO
References
Case No. ADJ4225400 (MON0336507)
Regular
Sep 27, 2010

NANCY GILPEN vs. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, BROADSPIRE

This case involved a discrepancy between verified statements from Dr. Burstein's collections manager and the defendant's attorney regarding service of notice and evidence for a trial. The Appeals Board removed the case to address potential sanctions due to this conflict. While proofs of service suggested documents were sent to Dr. Burstein, the Board could not definitively conclude intent to falsify. Therefore, the Board rescinded its notice of intention to impose sanctions and will not impose them.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionsVerified PleadingsMaterial DiscrepancyCollections ManagerLaw FirmPetition for ReconsiderationService of NoticeTrial
References
Case No. ADJ869605
Regular
Nov 19, 2012

MILES GRAY vs. AT&T, permissibly self-insured, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves an applicant who sustained a severe right lower extremity injury, leading to multiple surgeries, significant leg length discrepancy, and fused ankle/foot, requiring constant mobility aids. The Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME) provided opinions on impairment, and vocational experts testified regarding the applicant's ability to return to work. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the prior award, finding substantial evidence supporting the applicant's unsuitability for rehabilitation. Defendant's supplemental reply did not alter this decision.

Agreed Medical EvaluatorVocational ExpertPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedRight Lower Extremity InjuryMultiple FracturesLeg Length DiscrepancyShoe LiftAnkle FusionGait Derangement
References
Case No. ADJ3395089 (STK 0177203) ADJ2229380 (STK 0196966)
Regular
Apr 20, 2009

ROBERT MILLER vs. CAROL-CARTER DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board initially proposed sanctions against attorney Michael Linn, Esq., mistakenly listing the service date for his objection period. Despite Mr. Linn filing objections on March 4th and April 6th/9th, which were not technically untimely based on the actual service dates, the Board granted him further opportunities to respond. Ultimately, the Board extended the deadline to May 20, 2009, for Mr. Linn to file any additional objections to the proposed $\$ 500.00$ monetary sanction, citing potential service discrepancies and aiming to avoid any appearance of prejudice.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardmonetary sanctionsnotice of intentiondue processservice date discrepancyobjection to sanctionsadditional timeCalifornia Code of Regulationsfurlough directivesstate holidays
References
Case No. ADJ9056626
Regular
Apr 16, 2014

MARIA CALDERON, MARIA DELMI CALDERON vs. DANIEL TARVER, SUTTER INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves Maria Calderon's workers' compensation claim for an injury sustained as a housekeeper. The applicant alleged a head injury when a glass table shattered, causing her to slip and fall on a patio. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the evidence did not support the finding of injury arising out of and in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's credibility determination and finding of injury AOE/COE. The Board gave great weight to the ALJ's finding that the applicant was a credible witness despite minor discrepancies in the record.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeAOE/COECredibility FindingPetition DenialEmployer NegligenceMedical TreatmentHoly Cross Medical CenterOliveview Medical Center
References
Case No. ADJ9164133
Regular
Jun 03, 2014

KATHERINE MCGUIRE vs. ST. HELENA HOSPITAL; Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered by ADVENTIST HEALTH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award finding applicant sustained an industrial injury to her right knee. The defendant contended the award lacked substantial medical evidence and the judge improperly shifted the burden of proof. The WCAB found insufficient evidence to reconcile conflicting medical histories of the right knee injury. Therefore, the Board rescinded the award and returned the case for further proceedings to fully develop the record.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjurySubstantial Medical EvidenceBurden of ProofIndustrial CausationPreponderance of the EvidenceMedical HistoriesDiscrepancyAppeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ8182022
Regular
May 23, 2013

RAMON MALDONADO vs. G. SIMOES DAIRY, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Ramon Maldonado's petition for reconsideration, upholding the original findings and award. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found Maldonado's testimony regarding his work injury not credible. The judge determined that the defense witnesses' testimony was more persuasive, and the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof to show an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility determinations.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRECONSIDERATIONDENIEDWCJ REPORTCREDIBILITY FINDINGGARZA V. WORKERS' COMP. APPEALS BD.PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONNO INJURY ARISING OUT OF AND IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENTAPPLICANT'S TESTIMONYDEFENSE WITNESSES
References
Case No. ADJ9614737 ADJ9613068
Regular
Oct 30, 2018

NORA MAY RAMIREZ-CORTES vs. MARQUEZ BROTHERS ENTERPRISE, INC., TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of an administrative law judge's (WCJ) order assessing penalties for late payment of a workers' compensation award. The defendant argued that confusion over the applicant's name justified the delay, but the Board found the four-month delay after the initial inquiry unreasonable. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, denying reconsideration and upholding the penalty, interest, and attorney's fees. The Board found no evidence the defendant took reasonable steps to resolve the payment issue after May 9, 2017.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings and OrdersCompromise and ReleaseLabor Code section 5814Penalty assessmentInterestAttorney's feesPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ Report and RecommendationGood faith
References
Showing 1-10 of 85 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

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational