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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ8128330
Regular
Feb 14, 2014

FARID OMARI vs. MISSION ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL, ZURICH INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal filed by the defendant, Mission Essential Personnel and Zurich Insurance. The defendant sought to dismiss the applicant's claim, arguing it was preempted by the Defense Base Act. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, denying the petition. Furthermore, the Board noted multiple procedural violations by defense counsel, including improper pleading, lack of verification, and failure to adhere to rules regarding exhibits and counsel identification, warning against future frivolous conduct.

Petition for RemovalDefense Base Actjurisdictionpreemptedoff calendarWCJWCAB Rule 10490WCAB Rule 10843(b)WCAB Rule 10498WCAB Rule 10842(c)
References
Case No. VNO 0421742
Regular
Mar 17, 2008

CONRAD GAC vs. DAY SHIP MANAGEMENT, INC.

The WCAB affirmed the WCJ's decision dismissing the applicant's workers' compensation claim for lack of jurisdiction. The Board found the applicant's exclusive remedy lies in admiralty law against the United States, as the defendant employer acted as an agent of the U.S. government for a vessel owned by the U.S. Navy. Previously decided jurisdictional and timeliness issues were deemed law of the case and affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardConrad GacDay Ship ManagementInc.cumulative traumamerchant marine seamanpetition for reconsiderationlack of jurisdictionSuits in Admiralty ActPublic Vessels Act
References
Case No. ADJ7620386, ADJ7979192
Regular

OMAR ZARAZUA vs. INTERNATIONAL DISTRIBUTORS, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.

This case involved a Petition for Reconsideration filed by an individual who lacked standing. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition, adopting the administrative law judge's report. The Board emphasized that filing a petition without standing is a frivolous act. Consequently, the petition for reconsideration was formally dismissed.

StandingStranger to the casePetition for ReconsiderationDismissedFrivolous actSanctionsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ10544189
Regular
Nov 09, 2018

MARTIN GARCIA vs. HARVEST CHURCH, GUIDEONE MUTUAL

This case involves an applicant seeking an increased permanent impairment rating for a psychiatric injury stemming from a physical injury to his left foot. The applicant's injury occurred when a gate fell on his foot, and he claims this constitutes a "violent act" under Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(2)(A), which allows for exceptions to a general rule against increased impairment ratings for psychiatric issues arising from physical injuries. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the gate falling was an accidental injury, not a violent act, based on definitions involving strong physical force or extreme threats. The Board found the applicant's experience lacked the intensity seen in prior cases of violent acts, such as being struck by a car or being crushed in a vehicle.

AOE/COEViolent ActLabor Code Section 4660.1Psychiatric InjuryPermanent Impairment RatingPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Industrial InjuryPreponderance of the Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ7210580
Regular
Feb 17, 2012

DAVID COLLINS vs. CROWLEY TECHNICAL SERVICES, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a finding of concurrent jurisdiction for an injured seaman. The seaman was employed by Crowley Technical Services, an agent of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and injured while working on the U.S.S. Curtis, a vessel owned by a U.S. agency. Because the seaman was a member of the crew of a U.S. government-owned vessel and employed by a U.S. agent, federal law dictates exclusive jurisdiction, precluding California from adjudicating the claim.

Exclusive JurisdictionAdmiralty LawSeaman StatusJones ActLHWCACrew MemberMaritime AdministrationSuits in Admiralty ActPublic Vessels ActConcurrent Jurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ767870 (LAO 0816816) ADJ1415110 (VNO 0526399)
Regular
Mar 21, 2011

EVELYN PIERRE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES; Legally Uninsured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision, upholding the denial of a second penalty for unreasonably delayed permanent disability indemnity. The applicant sought two separate Labor Code section 5814 penalties, but the Board found the employer's failure to pay indemnity and the related section 4650(d) penalty constituted a single continuous act of non-payment, not separate and distinct acts as required by *Christian v. WCAB*. Additionally, the petition for reconsideration was denied for failing to include proof of service and notice of the applicant's right to independent counsel.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDENYING RECONSIDERATIONLab. Code§ 5814permanent disability indemnityLab. Code§ 4650(d)unreasonably delayedseparate and distinct actsattorney's fee
References
Case No. ADJ7562912
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

PEDRO LOPEZ vs. The Peninsula Beverly Hills (The Belvedere Hotel), Gallagher Bassett

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, rescinding a prior order that sanctioned the lien claimant $750 for filing a frivolous Declaration of Readiness to Proceed. The Board found the lien claimant acted in violation of regulations but is deferring a final decision pending a hearing on a motion to consolidate numerous similar cases. This consolidation motion, if denied, will allow the current case to proceed with potential sanctions, and the Board noted potential future disciplinary actions for lien representatives.

Declaration of ReadinessDORfrivoloussanctionlien claimantPetition for Reconsiderationrescindedtrial levelconsolidationlien representative
References
Case No. ADJ2942075
Regular
Jul 30, 2010

GREGORY REES vs. CHABOT-LAS POSITAS COMMUNITY COLLEGE, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

The Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration as the underlying order denying the PQME disqualification was procedural, not final. On its own motion, the Board granted removal to address the frivolous nature of the petition. The Board found the defendant's counsel acted in bad faith and frivolously by asserting ex parte communication violations where none existed under Labor Code section 4062.3(h), and thus intends to sanction counsel.

PQME disqualificationex parte communicationLabor Code section 5813frivolous bad faithAppeals Board Rule 10561removal on board motionfinal orderinterlocutory orderssignificant prejudiceirreparable harm
References
Case No. ADJ4405089 (MON 0358509) ADJ1180018 (MON 0358507) ADJ2565398 (MON 0358508)
Regular
Oct 11, 2013

JUAN ZEPEDA vs. PACIFIC GOURMET PRODUCE, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY for PENNSYLVANIA MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB initially considered imposing sanctions on the defendant for a frivolous Petition for Removal lacking legal citation. However, after the defendant delivered a previously disputed $20,000 check to the applicant, the Board reconsidered. Defense counsel apologized for the inadequate petition, claiming good faith belief in their legal position. Ultimately, the Board decided not to impose sanctions but warned that future frivolous filings without legal support may result in penalties.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRemoval PetitionFrivolousBad FaithSanctionsPetition for RemovalDefense CounselResponseGood FaithLegal Authority
References
Showing 1-10 of 750 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