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. 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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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. ADJ8574285
Regular
Jan 24, 2017

CALE HULSE vs. CALGARY FLAMES, FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a prior award, finding California lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the applicant's cumulative trauma claim. The Board determined that the applicant, a professional hockey player, had insufficient connection to California, playing only 25-42 games out of over 848 total games. This minimal contact, insufficient for a legitimate and substantial interest, meant requiring the defendant to litigate in California would violate due process, as established in *Federal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)*. Therefore, the applicant was awarded nothing.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCalgary FlamesFederal Insurance CompanyCale HulseSubject Matter JurisdictionCumulative Trauma InjuryProfessional Hockey PlayerDue ProcessFederal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)Legitimate Interest
References
Case No. ADJ6461309
Regular
Jul 19, 2012

JOSEPH MARTIN vs. City of Ukiah, Permissibly Self-Insured, administered by REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision regarding air ambulance service fees. The board found that California Administrative Rule 9789.70, which dictates reasonable fees for ambulance services, is preempted by the federal Airline Deregulation Act. This preemption applies because the rule attempts to regulate the prices and services of air carriers, which is exclusively within federal purview. Therefore, the board concluded that the specific fee limitations in Rule 9789.70 do not apply to air ambulance services.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardAD Rule 9789.70Air Ambulance ServicesAirline Deregulation ActADA Preemption49 U.S.C. § 41713(b)(1)Morales v. Trans World AirlinesState Regulation of Air CarriersWCABPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ704709 (RIV 0053815)
Regular
Sep 08, 2009

RAMON CHAVEZ vs. RANCHO MIRAGE COUNTRY CLUB, FEDERAL INSURANCE c/o CHUBB SERVICES, MITSUI SUMITOMO, AMERICAN NATIONAL FIRE, INCORPORATED, INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA by and through ACE, USA/ESIS

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim settled via Compromise and Release, leaving medical lien claims outstanding. The defendant insurer, Federal, sought to join other insurers (INA and American) based on new evidence regarding the period of injurious exposure. The trial judge dismissed INA and American, finding Federal's claims barred by the statute of limitations for contribution. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, holding that Federal was not seeking contribution but rather defending against a lien claim, making dismissal improper. The matter was returned to the trial level to determine liability for the medical treatment expenses.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRamon ChavezRancho Mirage Country ClubFederal InsuranceMitsui SumitomoInsurance Company of North AmericaACE USA ESISLabor Code Section 5500.5(e)Statute of LimitationsApportionment
References
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. ADJ8765034
Regular
May 03, 2017

Darren Langdon vs. New Jersey Devils, Montreal Canadiens, Federal Insurance Company

This case involves a professional hockey player's cumulative injury claim against his former teams, the Montreal Canadiens and New Jersey Devils, and their insurer, Federal Insurance Company. The applicant was hired in California by an earlier team, establishing WCAB jurisdiction despite playing for out-of-state teams later. Federal argued the WCAB lacked jurisdiction over the Montreal and New Jersey employments due to insufficient California contacts, but this was rejected as jurisdiction is based on being hired in California, and the cumulative injury occurred over time. The Board affirmed the finding of jurisdiction and liability, clarifying that employer-specific apportionment issues are addressed in separate proceedings.

Cumulative InjuryProfessional Hockey PlayerJurisdictionFederal Insurance CompanyNew Jersey DevilsMontreal CanadiensLabor Code SectionsApportionmentSubject Matter JurisdictionDue Process
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. ADJ7296817
Regular
Apr 25, 2017

BEATRICE SYWASSINK vs. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision denying Pacific Gas and Electric Company's (PG&E) claim for credit against Beatrice Sywassink's National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) award. The Board found that the NVICP, designed as a no-fault system, expressly prohibits compensation for expenses already covered by state compensation programs like workers' compensation. Allowing PG&E a credit would frustrate the intent of the federal program and potentially violate the Supremacy Clause. Furthermore, PG&E lacked standing to pursue a claim under the NVICP itself, and the program, not PG&E, holds subrogation rights to prevent double recovery.

NVICPthird party creditsubrogation statutesLabor Code section 3861Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Ordervaccine injury compensationduplicative recoveryMICRAGraham v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Showing 1-10 of 259 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