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. ADJ11167540
Regular
Feb 15, 2019

CHARLES SENIFF vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Federal Express's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding of jurisdiction. Federal Express argued the Board lacked jurisdiction because the applicant did not work in California after 2006. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found California jurisdiction supported by Labor Code section 3600.5(a) and precedent case law, deeming these sufficient grounds despite the defendant's jurisdictional challenge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFederal Express CorporationSedgwick Claims Management ServicesADJ11167540Santa Ana District OfficeAmended Findings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgejurisdictionLabor Code section 3600.5(a)Alaska Packers Asso. v. Industrial Acci. Com.
References
Case No. ADJ287866 LAO 0813289 ADJ7596806
Regular
Apr 30, 2012

CHESTER JACKSON vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS

This case involves a workers' compensation claim by Chester Jackson against Federal Express. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB affirmed the original decision but amended it to include penalties and interest owed to Dr. Friedman, pursuant to Labor Code section 4622(b), for specific dates of service. The exact amounts are to be adjusted by the parties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAmended DecisionPenaltiesInterestLC4622(b)Dates of ServiceFederal ExpressChester JacksonFriedman Psychiatric Med
References
Case No. ADJ741218 (OAK 0217902)
Regular
Sep 14, 2018

ROBIN JOHNSON vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS, BROADSPIRE, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration and Removal filed by the applicant, Robin Johnson, in a workers' compensation matter against Federal Express and its adjusters. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because reconsideration is only appropriate for final orders that determine substantive rights, not interlocutory or procedural decisions. The WCAB also denied the Petition for Removal, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm justifying such action. Therefore, the WCAB dismissed the petition and denied removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive Right or LiabilityInterlocutory OrdersProcedural DecisionsEvidentiary DecisionsPetition for RemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ12138014 ADJ10965293
Regular
Jan 21, 2020

DONALD WRIGHT vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The WCAB denied Defendant Federal Express Corporation's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding that applicant Donald Wright is entitled to a separate Agreed Medical Evaluator or Qualified Medical Examiner for his cumulative trauma (CT) claim. Defendant argued applicant waived this right by not filing a claim form for the CT claim, citing *Navarro v. City of Montebello*. However, the Board found that while the initial finding of injury AOE/COE was a threshold issue, the entitlement to a separate QME for the CT claim was interlocutory. As Defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, removal was denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDONALD WRIGHTFEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATIONADJ12138014ADJ10965293Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJcumulative trauma (CT) claimpanel qualified medical evaluator (QME)
References
Case No. ADJ9843286
Regular
Oct 10, 2017

MARQUIS MAYFIELD vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, PSI, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

In *Mayfield v. Federal Express Corporation*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior order. The WCAB rescinded an August 2, 2017 order that had commuted future weekly payments to a lump sum of $6,000. This rescission was based on the defendant's petition for reconsideration, supported by the applicant's counsel, who also requested rescission. The primary reason for rescission was that the full settlement award had already been advanced to the applicant, leaving no remaining funds for commutation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCommutation OrderRescindedFederal Express CorporationSedgwick CMSPermanent Disability AwardEconomic HardshipStatement of Non-OppositionAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ2238226
Regular
Mar 04, 2013

JUDINE JACOBS vs. RIVERSIDE-SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY INDIAN HEALTH, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the dismissal of an applicant's claim, finding it lacked jurisdiction due to Indian tribal sovereign immunity. The applicant, a nurse, claimed a psyche injury while employed by Riverside-San Bernardino County Indian Health, Inc. (RSB). RSB, despite being incorporated under California law, was deemed a governmental entity linked to tribes and serving federal policy, thus entitled to sovereign immunity. The Board found no evidence of an explicit waiver of this immunity.

Tribal sovereign immunityWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndian Healthpsyche injurynursefindings and orderjurisdictionpetition for reconsiderationreport and recommendationadministrative law judge
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. ADJ4615568 (MON 0293691)
Regular
Dec 01, 2014

EXELANI YOUNG vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order dismisses a petition for reconsideration filed by attorney Lester J. Friedman. The dismissal is based on the finding that the petition is moot because an Amended Order Approving Compromise and Release and Award, issued by the WCJ, preserved the petitioner's right to attorney's fees. Therefore, the petitioner is not currently aggrieved by the WCAB's decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationMootCompromise and ReleaseAwardAttorney's FeesAggrievedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJFederal ExpressSedgwick Claims Management Services
References
Case No. ADJ2185336 (SRO 0139457)
Regular
Mar 02, 2009

TRACY GRAY (GRAY-STERNE) vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as procedural, finding the WCJ's decision was not a final order. The Board denied the applicant's petition for removal, affirming the WCJ's ruling that Dr. Joel's second medical report was untimely based on regulatory timeframes. Defendant's petition for removal was also denied, with the Board adopting the WCJ's reasoning for returning the matter to the trial level. A dissenting opinion argued for the admissibility of the second report and against appointing a replacement QME due to waiver and potential prejudice.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardQualified Medical EvaluatorPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code Section 139.2(j)(1)(A)Rule 38Untimely ReportReplacement QMEWaiver of ObjectionMedical-Legal Evaluations
References
Case No. ADJ409820 ADJ1572678 ADJ3967299 ADJ349576
Regular
Dec 08, 2010

VELEDA BURTON vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS, permissibly self-insured; SEDGWICK CLAIMS SERVICES

In this workers' compensation case, the applicant, Veleda Burton, sought to disqualify the administrative law judge (WCJ) presiding over her five consolidated claims. The WCJ denied the petition, finding no stated grounds for disqualification and noting that the request was untimely as an automatic reassignment request. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) adopted the WCJ's report, expressly incorporating its reasoning, and denied the petition for disqualification. The WCAB also concluded the request was untimely under California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 10453.

Petition for DisqualificationAdministrative Law JudgeReassignmentUntimely RequestCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10453WCJ ReportDeniedFederal ExpressSedgwick Claims ServicesVeleda Burton
References
Showing 1-10 of 419 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