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. ADJ1 0544723
Regular
Feb 21, 2017

CARLOS BARRAZA AYON vs. GILL RANCH COMPANY, INC.; ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Notice of Benefit Ineligibility regarding a Return to Work Supplement, which was denied due to untimely application. The applicant argued inadequate notice of their right to a supplemental job displacement voucher (SJDV). The Appeals Board dismissed the petition as premature, finding the Director's decision was not yet subject to review at the trial level. The matter was returned to the trial level to first determine the applicant's entitlement to an SJDV, as their underlying case settlement did not address this issue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReturn to Work Supplement ProgramSupplemental Job Displacement VoucherNotice of Benefit IneligibilityPetition for ReconsiderationPrematureTrial LevelAdjudicate EntitlementCompromise and ReleaseLabor Code Section 5900(a)
References
Case No. ADJ4350009 (GOL 0097400)
Regular
Apr 09, 2018

NED PATTIZ vs. MTC TRUCKING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the original findings. The Board agreed with the applicant that the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) entitlement and its credit rights should be determined concurrently. The prior decision had deferred the entitlement issue pending resolution of credit amounts. The case is returned for a new final decision that addresses all pending issues comprehensively.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundSIBTFcreditCompromise and Release AgreementSocial Security disability benefitspermanent totally disabledPetition for ReconsiderationWCJAppeals Boardrescinded
References
Case No. ADJ1378934 (VNO 0542019), ADJ7423562
Regular
Nov 07, 2013

VICTORIA BARNETT vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's order to take the case off calendar. The WCJ improperly deferred the issue of home health care entitlement and reimbursement, which Applicant contended SB 863 did not preclude. The Board remanded the case for an expedited hearing to determine entitlement to home health care, whether SB 863 applies, and to resolve lien reimbursement issues afterward.

Petition for RemovalSB 863home health careexpedited hearingLabor Code § 4610applicant's entitlementretroactive reimbursementstipulated awardpetition to reopenApplication for Adjudication of Claim
References
Case No. ADJ6692231
Regular
Nov 23, 2016

DONALD BARNARD vs. SCHELLINGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LINCOLN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY IN LIQUIDATION

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify the commencement date of permanent disability indemnity payments. Despite a previous finding incorporating a DEU commutation suggesting an April 15, 2014 start date, the Board ruled that Labor Code section 4650 dictates entitlement begins the day after temporary disability ends. Therefore, applicant is entitled to permanent disability payments starting October 2, 2010, with a 15% increase commencing sixty days after April 15, 2014. The matter is returned for further proceedings to adjust benefits and attorney fees accordingly.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJDEU commutationpermanent disabilitycommencement dateretroactive benefitsLabor Code § 4650Brower v. David Jones Construction
References
Case No. ADJ3578571
Regular

RONALD FUDALA vs. CONTRA COSTA ELECTRIC, INC., CNA INSURANCE CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Ronald Fudala's Petition for Removal against Contra Costa Electric, Inc. and CNA Insurance Corporation. The dismissal was based on the mediator's report, which indicated the disputed issue of entitlement to ankle surgery had been resolved. Consequently, the matter before the Board became moot.

Petition for RemovalAnkle SurgeryMoot IssueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalContra Costa ElectricCNA Insurance CorporationADJ3578571OAK 0266336Mediator Report
References
Case No. ADJ 7552376
Regular
Apr 04, 2016

HECTOR REYES BARRERA vs. RCO REFORESTING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Applicant Hector Reyes Barrera sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that he settled his right to a Supplemental Job Displacement Benefits (SJDB) voucher in a Compromise and Release (C&R) agreement. Barrera argued he did not understand he was waiving this benefit and did not initial the relevant section. However, the C&R clearly stated the settlement amount included monies for the SJDB voucher, and the Order Approving C&R explicitly included SJDB in the release. Therefore, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the finding that Barrera settled his entitlement to the SJDB voucher.

Supplemental Job Displacement BenefitsSJDB voucherCompromise and ReleaseC&RPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJwaivervocational rehabilitationentitlement
References
Case No. ADJ9350015
Regular
Feb 24, 2017

LAURA SIERRA vs. RUIZ CONTRACTING, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by MEADOWBROOKS INSURANCE GROUP, ICW

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Star Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that Star Insurance failed to meet its burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to establish entitlement to contribution. Furthermore, the petition did not adequately explain why new medical evidence was unavailable prior to the close of discovery. Therefore, the petition was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationArbitrator's ReportBurden of ProofAffirmative of the IssuePreponderance of the EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionReasonable Medical ProbabilityInadequate Medical HistoriesCumulative Trauma
References
Case No. ADJ7735457, ADJ6720971, ADJ7722714, ADJ7336302, ADJ6841161
Regular
Jan 25, 2013

JOHN HARRIS vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, TRISTAR INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed John Harris's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order, as the prior decision did not determine substantive benefit entitlement. Furthermore, the petition was deemed successive, as it sought to re-litigate an issue previously denied under a different procedural designation. The Board had previously denied applicant's request for removal regarding an orthopedist evaluation of his right knee, finding no significant prejudice. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalNon-final orderSuccessive petitionSubstantive issueEntitlement to benefitsOrthopedist evaluationSignificant prejudiceIrreparable harmWCJ denial
References
Case No. ADJ6762619 ADJ6762627 ADJ6762634
Regular
Sep 10, 2018

EDWARD SHER vs. CAST & CREW ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, ENTERTAINMENT PARTNERS, AIG, NBC UNIVERSAL/ELECTRIC INSURANCE

This case concerns an applicant's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The applicant sought inclusion of a life pension in an award that already recognized 70% permanent disability. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to amend the award, confirming the statutory entitlement to a life pension for 70% or more permanent disability. The Board otherwise affirmed the original award, incorporating the WCJ's reasoning. A defendant's untimely request to amend the party defendants was declined but may be addressed at the trial level.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings Award and Orderpermanent disabilitylife pensionLabor Code § 4659WCJ ReportDefendants' Answerslife pension amendmentstatutory entitlement
References
Case No. ADJ1922528 (AHM 0096025) ADJ1909758 (AHM 0129156)
Regular
Mar 23, 2009

Rafael Rivas vs. STEFAN MERLI PLASTERING CO, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND INSURED GLENDALE

In this case, the applicant sought vocational rehabilitation benefits over five years after his injury, which the judge initially denied based on the statute of limitations. However, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the denial, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found that because there was no prior adjudication of the applicant's right to vocational rehabilitation and he remained temporarily disabled without a permanent disability finding, his request could still be considered under Labor Code Section 5405.5. This decision emphasizes that jurisdiction for vocational rehabilitation can extend beyond five years from the injury date when entitlement hasn't been previously determined.

Vocational rehabilitation benefitsStatute of LimitationsLabor Code section 5410Labor Code section 5405.5Date of injuryReinstatementJurisdictionPermanent disabilityTemporary total disabilityAgreed Medical Examiners
References
Showing 1-10 of 892 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