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. ADJ10765191
Regular
May 18, 2018

LARHONISH CAREY vs. MOLINA HEALTHCARE, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY

Applicant's attorneys seek reconsideration of a $0.00 attorney's fee award where their Compromise and Release contemplated a $1,350.00 fee. The Board granted reconsideration, finding procedural errors in the attorney's fee disclosure forms and the signing of the C&R by a non-attorney representative. The Board will affirm the $0.00 fee award unless the attorneys correct these deficiencies within 15 days.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseAttorney FeesLabor Code section 4906WCAB Rule 10773Non-attorney Hearing RepresentativeFee Disclosure StatementAttorney DisclosureExpedited Trial Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ2301965 (FRE 0218846)
Regular
May 21, 2009

LARRY BARNES vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Legally Uninsured, Adjusted By STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the award regarding applicant's attorney's fee. The original award calculated the fee as 15% of the total permanent disability award ($3,156.56). However, the Board found this unreasonable given the defendant's credit for a prior permanent disability award. The Board recalculated the fee as 15% of the actual amount payable to the applicant after credit ($579.75), deeming this a reasonable fee for services rendered.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityAttorney's FeeStipulationsCredit for Prior AwardDWC/WCAB Policy and Procedural ManualLabor CodeReasonableness of FeeDisclosure Statement
References
Case No. ADJ10825156
Regular
Jul 28, 2025

RAMON MUNOZ vs. THE EDWARD THOMAS COMPANY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendant's Petition for Reconsideration to address a clarification regarding attorney's fees. The Board affirmed the WCJ's Findings and Award, which found applicant sustained injury to the right knee and hypertension, denied apportionment for hypertension, and disallowed credit for temporary disability overpayment. The Board specifically found that the defendant failed to meet its burden for hypertension apportionment. The only amendment made was to explicitly state that attorney's fees should be held in trust pending the filing of a fee disclosure statement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardRight Knee InjuryHypertensionApportionmentTemporary Disability OverpaymentAttorney FeesFee Disclosure StatementPanel Qualified Medical Examiner
References
Case No. ADJ11757061
Regular
Jun 23, 2025

NATASHA LOEFFLER vs. UCSD MEDICAL CENTER, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Natasha Loeffler's petition for reconsideration of a prior Findings and Award. The Board found the workers' compensation administrative law judge erred by not assessing attorney's fees on temporary disability indemnity and noted issues with the applicant's attorney's fee disclosure statement. Additionally, a clerical error in the applicant's earnings was identified. Consequently, the Board rescinded the original Findings and Award, substituted new findings deferring the attorney's fees issue and correcting the earnings, and returned the case for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAttorney's FeesTemporary Disability IndemnityPermanent DisabilityEarnings CalculationFee Disclosure StatementLabor Code Section 4906(e)WCAB Rule 10842Clerical Error
References
Case No. ADJ10742272
Regular
Oct 18, 2019

MAGALI BOQUIN vs. A&E BUILDING MAINTENANCE, INC., INSURED BY CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, C/O BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration for lien claimant, Bridges Law, reversing the WCJ's denial of a fee. While the applicant settled their claim for $100,000 with a $15,000 attorney fee, Bridges Law successfully argued they provided legal services before being dismissed. The Board found Bridges Law entitled to a $750 fee for their contributions to the case.

Compromise and Releaseattorneys feelien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Order and AwardWCJapplicantfee disclosure statementdeclaration of readiness to proceedsubstitution of attorneys
References
Case No. FRE 0222651
Regular
Jul 15, 2008

CHRISTOPHER HUNT vs. MADERA COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that limited a lien claimant's facility fees to the Official Medical Fee Schedule. The Board found the WCJ erred by not applying the correct *Kunz* standard for determining the reasonableness of outpatient surgery facility fees, which considers factors beyond the fee schedule. The case is remanded for further proceedings to properly develop the record according to *Kunz*.

KunzOfficial Medical Fee Scheduleoutpatient surgery facility feeslien claimantreconsiderationen banc decisionreasonableness of feesusual feegeographical areacontractually negotiated fees
References
Case No. ADJ4673406 (ANA 0403334) ADJ4233924 (ANA 0376527)
Regular
Sep 29, 2009

Joseph Vella vs. Hitchcock Automotive, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns a dispute over the reasonableness of a lien claimant's billing for outpatient surgery services. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the original award, finding the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by concluding the lien claimant met its burden based solely on its usual billing practices without a proper analysis of reasonableness. The Board remanded the case to the ALJ to determine a reasonable fee considering all evidence, including the lien claimant's and defendant's submissions, as outlined in *Kunz* and *Tapia*. The decision emphasizes that the lien claimant bears the affirmative burden to prove the reasonableness of its fee.

Kunz doctrinelien claimantreasonable feerebuttal evidenceTapiabillingmedical treatmentoutpatient surgeryinpatient hospitalDRG
References
Case No. ADJ7688511
Regular
Jul 18, 2012

VIRGINIA MARTINEZ vs. SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE, CORVEL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order disallowing lien claimant's attorney fees. The Board found the lien claimant's fee claim excessive and unsubstantiated, particularly as the applicant negotiated a settlement herself after dismissing the lien claimant. Furthermore, any alleged fee agreement was invalid due to untimely submission and non-compliance with statutory requirements for WCAB approval. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning in its entirety.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVirginia MartinezSuperior Court of OrangeCorvelADJ7688511Order Denying Reconsiderationlien claimantattorney's feescompromise and release agreementmedical reports
References
Case No. ADJ2340102 (LAO 0751270) ADJ4406096 (LAO 0784412)
Regular
Apr 27, 2017

JOSE MORFIN vs. WHITE MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, ADVENTIST HEALTH

This case involves an award of additional attorney's fees for applicant's counsel in the California Court of Appeal. The court remanded the matter for supplemental fees after the defendant's unsuccessful Petition for Writ of Review. While applicant's attorney sought $11,480.00 in fees, the Board found this excessive and awarded $8,000.00 based on a review of the appellate work and the contentious history of the litigation. The Board also awarded the requested costs of $67.58, totaling $8,067.58 in additional appellate attorney's fees and costs.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSupplemental Attorney's FeesPetition for Writ of ReviewLabor Code § 5801Labor Code § 5811Appellate Attorney's FeesItemization of Attorney's FeesExcessive Fee RequestReasonable Fee DeterminationCase-by-Case Basis
References
Case No. ADJ3547384; ADJ1113447
Regular
Jul 07, 2025

JOSE BERRIOS vs. JERRYS FAMOUS DELI, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, CENTRE INSURANCE

The applicant's current attorney petitioned for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) order that awarded the entire $90,000 attorney's fee to the applicant's prior counsel due to the current attorney's failure to file a timely disclosure statement. The Appeals Board found that the current attorney's initial disclosure statement did not comply with Labor Code § 4906(e) and that payment is precluded for services rendered before a compliant form is filed. However, the Board granted the petition for reconsideration to allow further review of the factual and legal issues, noting that the order is not a final decision on the merits and encourages mediation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAttorney's FeesLabor Code § 4906Disclosure StatementCompromise and ReleaseCIGACentre InsuranceWCJReconsideration Granted
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,952 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