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. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Case No. ADJ6889455
Regular
Jun 10, 2011

SALVADOR RUIZ vs. WASTE CONNECTIONS INC., ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a psychiatric injury claim where the employer asserted a good faith personnel action defense. The Board found the employer failed to prove the personnel action was in good faith, noting evidence of racial animus and inconsistent disciplinary practices. Furthermore, even if the action were deemed in good faith, the employer did not meet its burden of proving it was a substantial cause (35-40%) of the applicant's psychiatric injury, as the medical evidence did not apportion causation. Therefore, the defense under Labor Code section 3208.3(h) was not established.

Labor Code section 3208.3(h)psychiatric injurygood faith personnel actionsubstantial causeobjective reasonablenesspretextualagreed medical evaluatorcausation apportionmentmedical evidencediscriminatory
References
Case No. ADJ991157 (GRO 0032393)
Regular
Jun 07, 2010

RANDY SHOOK (Deceased) GLENDA STAFFORD vs. ARMORED TRANSPORT, ESIS SOUTHFIELD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration in the case of Randy Shook's suicide. Applicant argued the employer's investigation was conducted in bad faith, thus invalidating the "good faith personnel action" defense. However, the Board found the investigation met the objective reasonableness standard and was undertaken in subjective good faith. The Board distinguished this case from those involving criminal false imprisonment and affirmed its authority to reject a WCJ's findings when substantial evidence supports its own. Therefore, compensation remains barred under Labor Code section 3208.3(h).

Labor Code section 3208.3(h)good faith personnel actionindustrial suicidepsychiatric injurydeceit and coercionpreliminary investigationcriminal misconductsubjective good faithobjective reasonablenesscriminal false imprisonment
References
Case No. ADJ9700517
Regular
Oct 05, 2018

JEANNE WILLIAMS vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board found the original decision on the good faith personnel action defense was unclear and required further development. Specifically, the WCJ must clarify which events constituted lawful, nondiscriminatory, good faith personnel actions. The parties will then need to re-address whether these specific actions were a substantial cause of the applicant's psychiatric injury with the medical evaluator.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPSYCHE INJURYGOOD FAITH PERSONNEL ACTIONLABOR CODE §3208.3(H)TEMPORARY DISABILITYPANEL QUALIFIED MEDICAL EVALUATOR (PQME)DR. ELATROZYROLDA ANALYSISSUBSTANTIAL CAUSELAWFUL PERSONNEL ACTION
References
Case No. ADJ10679452
Regular
Jun 29, 2018

HORTENCIA AGUILAR vs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, EMPLOYMENT & HUMAN SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it failed to meet the procedural requirements of Labor Code section 5902 and WCAB Rule 10842 by not providing specific references to the record. The Board adopted the Judge's report and recommendation, which found that the employer's disciplinary action against the applicant was not taken in good faith. Specifically, the employer failed to follow its own investigatory procedures by not including the applicant's input and by not adhering to its dispute resolution process. The Judge concluded that the employer's actions lacked the objective reasonableness required for a good-faith personnel action under applicable case law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5902WCAB Rule 10842Report and RecommendationInjury to psycheGood faith personnel actionObjective good faith standardCotran v. Rollins Hudig Hall Intl.Inc.
References
Case No. ADJ6784503-M; ADJ7336025
Regular
Aug 24, 2012

WILLIAM AGUILAR vs. TIME WARNER CABLE INC.

This case involves William Aguilar's claim for psychiatric injury against Time Warner Cable, stemming from two periods of employment. The Administrative Law Judge found Aguilar sustained industrial psychiatric injuries in both roles and ruled the defendant waived the "good faith personnel action" defense under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). While the majority affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding the defense was not raised properly and not proven even if considered, Commissioner Lowe dissented. Commissioner Lowe argued the defense was timely raised and that the employer's reassignment of territories constituted a good faith personnel action, thereby barring compensation.

Labor Code 3208.3(h)Good Faith Personnel ActionPsychiatric InjuryCumulative Industrial InjuryReconsiderationWCJ ReportDissenting OpinionObjective Good Faith StandardSubstantial CausePredominant Cause
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
Case No. ADJ176329 (VNO 0542064)
Regular
Jun 15, 2009

Jesse W. Pratt vs. Lancaster Healthcare Center, Zurich America Insurance Company

This case involved a maintenance supervisor who claimed industrial injury to his psyche and various physical ailments due to alleged stress and harassment by his supervisor. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the initial award. The Board found that the applicant's psychiatric injury was substantially caused by lawful, nondiscriminatory, good-faith personnel actions, specifically workplace critiques and job modifications by management. Consequently, compensability for the psychiatric injury was barred under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). The issue of whether the applicant's non-psychiatric conditions were industrially caused was deferred for further development of the record at the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 3208.3(h)good faith personnel actionpsychiatric injuryindustrial injurycompensabilitymaintenance supervisorreconsiderationFindings and Awardactual events of employment
References
Case No. SFO 0479135
Regular
Nov 09, 2007

ALBERT T. WILLIAMS vs. ST. LUKE'S HOSPITAL, UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY ADMINISTERED BY LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The WCAB found the medical evidence insufficient to establish causation for the applicant's claimed psychological injury. Furthermore, the WCJ failed to conduct the required multi-level analysis for evaluating claims involving good faith personnel actions.

Labor Code section 3208.3(h)good faith personnel actionpsychiatric injurypredominant causesubstantial causeRolda analysisobjective good faith standardwillful misconductworkplace stresscumulative trauma
References
Case No. ADJ13170316
Regular
Mar 14, 2023

ELEAZAR ORTEGA vs. SANTA CRUZ MONTEREY MERCED MANAGED MEDICAL CARE, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE INSURANCE COMPANY

Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer: The applicant sought reconsideration after the WCJ denied her claim for psychiatric injury AOE/COE, finding that actual employment events did not predominantly cause her condition. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the applicant failed to prove alleged unfair treatment by her supervisor or HR was not a subjective belief. The Board also affirmed the WCJ's finding that any actual employment events, such as performance critiques, constituted lawful, good faith personnel actions. Therefore, the applicant's petition was denied as she did not establish a compensable psychiatric injury.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPSYCHIATRIC INJURYAOE/COEFINDINGS AND ORDERPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONQUALIFIED MEDICAL EXAMINERPREDOMINANT CAUSEGOOD FAITH PERSONNEL ACTIONLABOR CODE SECTION 3208.3SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,607 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