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. M2002-01204-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 03, 2003

What Happened in Felix vs. Weber Metals Reconsideration?

Hazel Ann Edde (Wife) filed for divorce from Gladys Dalton Edde (Husband) after a thirty-six year marriage, citing irreconcilable differences, inappropriate marital conduct, and adultery. The trial court granted the divorce to the Wife, divided marital property, and awarded her $425 per month in alimony in futuro. Husband appealed the alimony award, arguing that Wife had no need for it and he lacked the ability to pay. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee at Nashville affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the evidence supported the trial court's findings regarding Wife's economic disadvantage, the infeasibility of her rehabilitation, and Husband's ability to provide support. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

DivorceAlimonySpousal SupportMarital Property DivisionAppellate ReviewEconomic DisadvantageAbility to PayInappropriate Marital ConductAdulteryTrial Court Discretion
References
12
Case No. SDO 0328208
Regular
Mar 17, 2008

How Did the WCAB Rule in Hardgrove vs. Intercon Security?

The Appeals Board clarified that for Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) purposes, the commencement of temporary disability payments is the date the employer first mails a temporary disability indemnity check, not when EDD benefits begin. Furthermore, EDD benefits, even if reimbursed by the employer, do not count towards the 104-week cap on temporary disability payments. Consequently, the employer's liability for further temporary disability payments extends from the date of the first actual indemnity payment until October 6, 2007.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardArmando AdameAutomotive Engineered ProductsZenith Insurance CompanyLabor Code section 4656(c)(1)Temporary Total DisabilityTemporary Disability IndemnityEmployment Development DepartmentUnemployment Compensation DisabilityHawkins v. Amberwood Products
References
2
Case No. ADJ4344691 (LAO 0885639) ADJ2533065 (LAO 0885640)
Regular
May 08, 2015

What Did the WCAB Decide in Cuadra vs. Community Home Care?

This case concerns a defendant's challenge to an order compelling payment of an Employment Development Department (EDD) lien. The defendant argued it shouldn't pay the lien as there was no determination of applicant's entitlement to temporary disability benefits when EDD payments were made. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the judge's order to pay the EDD lien. The Board found the defendant's petition for reconsideration flawed as it failed to address the stipulation to pay EDD signed by defense counsel. Since the defendant did not seek relief from the binding stipulation, the WCAB upheld the original order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria CervantesConsolidated Retirement HomesAtherton Baptist HomesArch Insurance CompanyGallagher Bassett ServicesPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay Lien ClaimantEmployment Development DepartmentEDD lien
References
1
Case No. ADJ8753985; ADJ8753959
Regular
Dec 02, 2015

How Were Death Benefits Handled in Bocanegra vs. Sun-Gro Commodities?

This case concerns a dispute over a workers' compensation lien filed by the Employment Development Department (EDD). The defendant, Ace Building Maintenance, settled a workers' compensation claim via Compromise and Release (C&R) with the applicant, Bob Borbeck, while aware of EDD's lien for unemployment benefits that duplicated temporary disability payments. The defendant argues they provided sufficient notice to EDD regarding benefit payments and should not be liable for the lien. However, the Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, finding them liable for EDD's lien because they settled the case without resolving it, thus agreeing to pay any subsequently determined amount.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseEDD LienUnemployment Compensation BenefitsTemporary Disability BenefitsLabor Code Section 4904Notice of Lien ClaimDuplicate Benefits
References
3
Case No. ADJ1626199 (SAC 0323236)
Regular
Aug 03, 2009

Can a WCJ Be Disqualified for Appearance of Bias?

This case concerns a dispute over reimbursement for Employment Development Department (EDD) benefits paid to the applicant, Steven Williams. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board previously ruled that Earthlink, Inc. was entitled to credit for the full EDD lien amount, reversing an earlier Administrative Law Judge decision that ordered additional payment. The Board affirmed its prior decision, finding no error in allowing credit for the EDD payments. Both parties' requests for sanctions against each other were denied.

WCABReconsiderationFindings and AwardEmployment Development DepartmentEDD LienLabor Code §4903.2Cumulative TraumaTemporary Total DisabilityIndemnityCredit
References
0
Case No. ADJ1818368 (VNO 0523027) ADJ3597904 (VNO 0529502)
Regular
Nov 14, 2011

What Were the Key Rulings in Torrez vs. SuperShuttle?

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration and dismissed the applicant's petition. The defendant argued that the WCJ's order to pay the EDD lien would result in undue enrichment due to prior payments, but the WCAB adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the defendant was on notice of the EDD's lien and paid benefits at its own peril. The applicant's petition was dismissed as untimely. The WCAB denied the defendant's petition, finding no error in the original award ordering payment of the EDD lien.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryCervical SpineElbowsCumulative TraumaPsychological SystemPermanent DisabilityApportionmentEDD LienPetition for Reconsideration
References
9
Case No. ADJ7917429
Regular
Mar 10, 2014

Why Was Removal Denied in Rush vs. California Correctional Institution?

This case concerns a dispute over defendant's credit for Employment Development Department (EDD) payments against the applicant's permanent disability award. Initially, the WCJ granted the defendant credit for the entire period EDD paid benefits. Upon reconsideration, the Appeals Board clarified that the defendant is only entitled to credit for EDD payments made from January 2, 2012, to May 10, 2012, as these were effectively permanent disability advances. The Board rescinded the original award and amended the findings to reflect this adjusted credit.

Petition for ReconsiderationStipulated AwardPermanent DisabilityTemporary DisabilityCredit for PaymentsEmployment Development DepartmentEDDState Disability InsuranceSDIReimbursement
References
1
Case No. ADJ1167245
Regular
Jun 03, 2013

What Did the WCAB Clarify in Ontiveros vs. Savers Stores?

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend an award concerning an electrocution injury. The Board modified the award to have the EDD lien for duplicative payments deducted from the applicant's permanent disability award, rather than reimbursed separately by the defendant, and rescinded the award of interest to EDD. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings of 100% permanent disability without apportionment and the exclusion of sub rosa video evidence. The matter was returned to the WCJ to recalculate the commutation of the award to incorporate the EDD lien payment.

Electrocution injuryPermanent disabilityApportionmentSub rosa videoEDD lienCommutationDuplicative paymentsVocational rehabilitationMedical evidenceCardiac disability
References
0
Case No. ADJ7190373
Regular
Dec 30, 2011

Why Was Reconsideration Denied in Gomez vs. Dorothy Stevens?

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address newly discovered evidence regarding additional EDD disability payments made to the applicant after the trial. Defendant Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. learned that the applicant began receiving EDD benefits on the trial date, May 11, 2011, and continuing thereafter. The Board rescinded the prior award and returned the case to the trial level to incorporate these payments, EDD's lien, and potential overpayment and credit issues into a comprehensive final decision. This ensures applicant receives correct benefits and avoids bifurcation of issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Orders and AwardIndustrial InjuryAssistant ManagerPermanent Stationary DateApportionmentFuture Medical TreatmentNewly Discovered EvidenceEmployment Development Department (EDD)
References
0
Case No. ADJ6604427, ADJ8192308
Regular
Jul 31, 2014

Why Was Reconsideration Dismissed in Sabino vs. Johnson Pump Company?

In this workers' compensation case, the applicant initially stipulated to a lower average weekly wage, which the Board found to be a final determination that could not be revisited due to lack of good cause and the five-year statute of limitations. The Board affirmed the employer's credit for payments made to the Employment Development Department (EDD) to prevent double recovery. Furthermore, the Board found no unreasonable delay by the employer in payments to EDD, thus denying the applicant's penalty claim. Finally, the Board rescinded the order requiring the applicant's attorney to repay fees voluntarily paid by EDD, as such repayment was not mandated by law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAC TransitSedgwick Claims Management ServicesADJ6604427ADJ8192308bus drivercumulative traumatemporary disability indemnityLabor Code section 4656(c)(2)mandatory settlement conference
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 3,353 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