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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ10177259
Regular
Apr 06, 2020

ROSA GUTIERREZ vs. MID VALLEY NUT COMPANY, INC., INTERCARE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) February 11, 2020 decision. The WCAB gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determinations, finding no substantial evidence to reject them. The applicant failed to prove that Mid Valley Nut Company, Inc. committed serious and willful misconduct, as the employee accused of such misconduct did not meet the legal definition of an executive, managing officer, or general superintendent. Therefore, the WCAB affirmed the original findings and orders.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationsGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.serious and willful misconductemployer's managing officerexecutivegeneral superintendentBigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals BdHunt
References
Case No. ADJ7892653
Regular
Jul 22, 2016

PETER ALVAREZ vs. CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the order that joined the Office of the Attorney General as a party. The Board found the Attorney General was not a necessary party as the applicant clearly identified the California National Guard as their employer. Furthermore, the Board raised a jurisdictional issue, as National Guard service under Title 32, which may apply here, generally precludes state workers' compensation benefits. The case is returned to the trial level for an evidentiary hearing to determine jurisdiction.

Petition for RemovalOrder Joining Party DefendantCalifornia National GuardState Active DutyTitle 32Title 10Inactive Duty TrainingMilitary and Veterans CodeNachbaurJurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ3605789 (GOL 0101314) ADJ2387995 (GOL 0101316) ADJ460036 (GOL 0101615)
Regular
Dec 12, 2011

JORGE VIVANCO vs. NEVERLAND VALLEY RANCH, ESTATE OF MICHAEL JACKSON, MJJ PRODUCTIONS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY, UNITED STAFFING ASSOCIATES, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, MONARCH CONSULTING dba PES PAYROLL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant claiming injuries while employed as a zookeeper for Neverland Valley Ranch and other entities. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior findings, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found that the trial judge erred by excluding evidence related to employment agreements under the parol evidence rule, which is relevant to determining employer status. Further development of the record is required to properly address the applicant's employment relationships with the defendant entities.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJorge VivancoNeverland Valley RanchMichael JacksonMJJ ProductionsTravelers IndemnityUnited Staffing AssociatesAmerican Home Assurance CompanyMonarch ConsultingPES Payroll
References
Case No. ADJ4678688 (LBO 0318838) ADJ820791 (LBO 0319383)
Regular
Dec 11, 2008

DONALD ANSON vs. EDELMAN MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY, PDQ PERSONNEL SERVICES, INTERCARE for SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for an employee injured while working for a general employer (PDQ) and a special employer (County of Los Angeles). The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) sought reconsideration after an order found them solely liable. The Appeals Board reversed, finding the County of Los Angeles, as a self-insured entity, is solely liable for benefits because its self-insurance constitutes "other insurance" under relevant statutes, excluding CIGA's coverage.

CIGAPDQ Personnel ServicesSuperior National Insurance CompanyliquidationIntercaregeneral employerspecial employerCounty of Los AngelesLabor Code section 3602(d)Rule 15360
References
Case No. ADJ3031957 (LAO 0795488) MF ADJ4656358 (NOR 0208475) ADJ8271117
Regular
Mar 24, 2014

MARIA ADONICAN vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES/GENERAL HOSPITAL

This case involves multiple industrial injuries claimed by the applicant, Maria Adonican. The defendant, County of Los Angeles/General Hospital, sought reconsideration of findings of total permanent disability for a 1993 injury and apportionment of disability among three injuries. The Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the 1993 injury was the primary cause of the applicant's total permanent disability, supported by medical evidence. Defendant's arguments regarding lack of evidence for total permanent disability and improper apportionment were rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria AdonicanCounty of Los AngelesGeneral HospitalJoint Findings Award and OrderPermanent Total DisabilitySpecific Industrial InjuryCumulative Industrial InjuryApportionmentAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)
References
Case No. ADJ3741925 (VNO 0106922) ADJ3558542 (VNO 0106921)
Regular
Jul 06, 2012

MICHELE KOTLARCHICK vs. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied General Motors' Petition for Reconsideration regarding a $500 contempt citation. The Board found the defendant's counsel persistently argued a point after the judge ruled against him and warned of contempt. This continued defiance constituted deliberate disobedience and flouting of the court's authority. Additionally, the Board denied the Petition for Removal concerning a discovery order, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMichele KotlarchickGeneral Motors CorporationPetition for ReconsiderationContempt citationVigorous advocacyDefiance of rulingDirect contemptLabor Code § 5309(c)Petition for Removal
References
Case No. ADJ1137286
Regular
Mar 03, 2009

PINAZ KOLAHI vs. GENERAL MOTORS CORP., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

Defendant General Motors seeks reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision awarding temporary disability, permanent disability, and future medical treatment to applicant Pinaz Kolahi. Defendant argues the cumulative trauma period ending date is unsupported, temporary disability is unsubstantiated, and permanent disability indemnity was calculated at an incorrect rate. The Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original and amended findings, and remanded the case for further proceedings due to an apparent inconsistency between the amended findings and opinion on decision. The Board expressed no opinion on the merits of the underlying contentions.

WCABADJ1137286VNO 0490167Pinaz KolahiGeneral Motors Corp.Sedgwick Claims ManagementFindings and AwardAmended Findings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationReport and Recommendation
References
Case No. ADJ2300229 (FRE 0183072) ADJ2635018 (FRE 0183073) ADJ3725774 (FRE 0183074)
Regular
Jul 19, 2016

ROBERT D. TULL vs. GENERAL LIGHTING SERVICE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION, In Liquidation

This case concerns Robert D. Tull's workers' compensation claims against General Lighting Service and the California Insurance Guarantee Association. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has issued an Opinion and Order Granting Petition for Reconsideration. Pending their Decision After Reconsideration, all future communications related to these cases must be directed to the Board's San Francisco office. This order reflects a procedural step in the ongoing appeals process for Tull's claims.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationLiquidationDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersMullen & FilippiService by MailDouglas LowRobert D. Tull
References
Showing 1-10 of 435 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