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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. RDG 0095368; RDG 0095369; RDG 0095573; RDG 0126270
Regular
Sep 25, 2007

HENRY PHILLIPE vs. GOTTSCHALKS, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow reimbursement for the applicant's vocational expert fees, reversing the WCJ's decision. The Board found it reasonable for the applicant to hire his own vocational expert to rebut the defendant's expert, especially given the passage of time since the original vocational feasibility report. Consequently, the defendant was ordered to reimburse the applicant's attorney for the $1,075.00 vocational expert cost.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationExpert Witness FeesVocational ExpertLabor Code Section 5811Qualified Rehabilitation Representative (QRR)LeBoeuf argumentAgreed Medical Examination (AME)Permanent DisabilityIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ7761748
Regular
Nov 18, 2019

JOSE VARGAS vs. WEST COAST LIQUIDATORS, INC., dba BIG LOTS STORES, ARCH INSURANCE, Administered by SEDGWICK CMS

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the recoverability of vocational expert costs and affirmed the applicant's 50% permanent disability rating. It held that the costs of vocational expert Robert Stoneburner's reports are recoverable, even if his opinions weren't found to be substantial evidence, as long as the expert was qualified and the costs were reasonable and necessary. The WCJ's credibility determination regarding the applicant was given significant weight, and the court found no basis to reject it. The case was remanded to determine the precise amount of recoverable expert costs.

Vocational expertPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent disabilityReimbursementLabor Code section 5811Appeals BoardWCJSubstantial evidenceExpert witness
References
Case No. GRO 32009
Regular
Jan 04, 2008

TEMICKA WILLIAMS vs. COMPASS HEALTH, INC., CNA CLAIMS PLUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a 19% permanent disability rating for an industrial injury sustained on October 25, 2004, ruling the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule applies. The Board also found applicant's vocational expert's testimony insufficient to rebut the rating and that the defendant is not liable for the expert's trial testimony costs. However, the Board remanded the issue of the vocational expert's lien for further determination of its reasonableness and necessity.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS)vocational expertdiminished future earning capacity (DFEC)Labor Code section 4660Dr. Anne Wallacelienreasonableness and necessitymedical-legal costsexpert testimony
References
Case No. ADJ7715497
Regular
Jan 17, 2015

SUDJAI SUKSAMRARN (Deceased) TUENJAI SUKSAMRARN (Widow) vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, overturning an earlier decision that barred Edward Steinbrecher from testifying as an expert witness. The Appeals Board found that while Steinbrecher's prior representation of the applicant in a third-party action raised questions about his impartiality, this affected the weight of his testimony, not its admissibility. The judge erred by disallowing testimony solely because the expert was not deemed "disinterested," as this is not a legal requirement for expert qualification. Therefore, Steinbrecher is now permitted to testify as an expert witness.

Petition for RemovalExpert Witness TestimonyDisinterested WitnessAdmissibilityWeight of EvidenceThird Party CreditIndustrial InjuryDeath BenefitQualified ExpertPrior Representation
References
Case No. ADJ3533537 (VNO 0556925)
Regular
Apr 14, 2016

Richard Varela vs. Morley Group, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed an award of $2,737.50 for an expert witness's trial testimony, clarifying that such expenses are permissible costs under Labor Code section 5811. The Board held that the expert's testimony regarding the necessity of home health care services was relevant to the lien claimants' burden of proof, even though the primary injury claim was ultimately unsuccessful. This decision distinguishes between medical-legal expenses and trial witness costs, allowing for the latter when reasonably incurred for essential elements of a lien claim. The Board found the expert's testimony necessary for the lien claimants to establish all elements of their case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSupplemental Findings of Fact and OrderLabor Code section 5811lien claimantshome health care servicesexpert testimonytrial testimonyreasonableness and necessityinjury AOE/COEmedical-legal expenses
References
Case No. ADJ4669912 (VNO 0530425) ADJ1143446 (VNO 0553298)
Regular
Nov 29, 2010

CLAUDIA ARIZMENDI vs. CLEUGH'S FROZEN FOODS, PACIFIC COMEPNSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration regarding the allowable reimbursement rate for medical treatment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration due to a discrepancy between the administrative law judge's (WCJ) original award and the testimony of the defendant's expert witness. The WCJ's award was based on an incorrect calculation of the expert's testimony, which the WCAB corrected to reflect the expert's stated daily allowable rate. Consequently, the WCAB amended the Findings and Award to reimburse the lien claimant at the higher rate of $86.72 per day.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeExpert WitnessReimbursement RateAcupuncture Procedure CodePhysical Therapy CodeBill Review Expert
References
Case No. ADJ7847287
Regular
Sep 20, 2011

MICHAEL WATERS vs. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE CO., BROADSPIRE

The WCAB granted reconsideration and rescinded an administrative law judge's order compelling the defendant to advance $2,000 to the applicant's attorney for a vocational expert's costs. While acknowledging that advances on permanent disability are common, the Board found the specific order to pay an attorney's trust account for potential future expert costs lacked statutory basis. The Board clarified that the applicant's attorney may incur such costs at their own expense and then seek reimbursement if deemed reasonable and necessary.

Petition for RemovalPetition for Reconsiderationvocational expertdiminished future earning capacitypermanent disabilityrehabilitation experttrust accountadvance costsreimbursementLabor Code sections 5811
References
Case No. ADJ1651527 (SBR 0314707)
Regular
Apr 11, 2023

TERRI GLASGOW vs. MASSIE DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award, rescinded the award, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The applicant contended the judge failed to rate her bladder injury and ignored vocational expert opinions. The WCAB agreed that the judge improperly applied the pyramiding principles to rate the bladder and lumbar injuries and misapplied case law regarding the consideration of medical and vocational expert opinions. Additionally, the WCAB noted the decision lacked sufficient detail regarding the basis for the overall permanent disability rating.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent Disability RatingBladder InjuryUrinary Stress IncontinenceSacral NeuropathyLumbar Spine InjuryPyramiding PrincipleMultiple Disabilities TableApportionment
References
Showing 1-10 of 696 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