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The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings.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. 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The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.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. 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. ADJ12471831
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

KATHLEEN ZIPP vs. ST HELENA U.S.D., PSI, NORTH BAY SCHOOLS INSURANCE AUTHORITY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a June 13, 2023, Findings and Order (F&O) which found her psychiatric injury claim barred by the good faith personnel action (GFPA) defense under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the F&O, determining that the medical evidence from the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME), Dr. Kothapalli, was not sufficiently detailed or Rolda-compliant regarding the causation percentages attributed to personnel actions by Ms. Ely and other school district 'players.' The matter was returned to the trial level for further development of the record, including clarification of events and potentially additional medical opinion, to ensure a proper substantial causation analysis.

Labor Code 3208.3Good Faith Personnel ActionPsychiatric InjuryPredominant CauseSubstantial CauseRolda AnalysisActual Events of EmploymentPersonnel ActionsLawful Nondiscriminatory Good FaithMedical Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ6655570
Regular
Oct 31, 2011

Pamela Lial vs. COUNTY OF STANISLAUS

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior decision, finding the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) opinion was not substantial evidence. The AME's opinion was deemed unreliable due to potential bias from defense counsel, insufficient medical history, and questionable diagnostic reasoning. The Board remanded the case for further development of the medical record and a new evaluation, instructing the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) to analyze potential actual employment events and personnel actions under the *Rolda* standard. The WCJ must determine if applicant sustained industrial psychiatric injury, considering whether any personnel actions were lawful and in good faith, and if so, if they substantially caused the injury.

Workers Compensation Appeals Boardpsychiatric injuryAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)defense counselcase lawapplicant's allegationssupervisor relationshippersonnel action defenselawful nondiscriminatory good faith personnel actioncausation
References
Case No. ADJ9320374
Regular
Jul 29, 2016

KURT KENDELL vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROBATION DEPARTMENT

This case concerns a county probation officer's claim for psychiatric injury. The applicant alleged his injury stemmed from perceived bad faith personnel actions by his supervisor, including excessive report editing and workload issues. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the prior award, finding the medical evidence regarding causation and the "good faith personnel action" defense was insufficient. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record, potentially through an Agreed Medical Examiner or a court-appointed physician, to clarify the causal relationship and the nature of the employer's actions.

Psychiatric injuryGood faith personnel action defenseLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Predominant causeSubstantial evidencePanel Qualified Medical Examiner (PQME)Rolda analysisActual events of employmentLawful nondiscriminatoryMedical probability
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. ADJ8358585
Regular
Mar 21, 2016

ELAINE HUERTA vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

In this workers' compensation case, the applicant, Elaine Huerta, claimed industrial injury to her psyche. The defendant, County of San Bernardino, sought reconsideration of a prior award finding the psychiatric injury compensable and rejecting the good faith personnel action defense. The Appeals Board denied the petition, affirming the judge's finding that the applicant's psychiatric injury was not substantially caused by lawful, non-discriminatory, good faith personnel actions. The Board found the applicant's injury resulted from the employer's deficient personnel management, including failure to address co-worker harassment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric injuryGood faith personnel actionLabor Code section 3208.3Predominant causeSubstantial causeRolda v. Pitney BowesInc.Multilevel analysisIndustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ7371382
Regular
Jun 02, 2014

EARL SMITH vs. TIME WARNER CABLE; CHARTIS, administered by ACE USA

This case involves a worker claiming psychiatric injury. The defendant seeks to dismiss the claim based on the "good faith personnel action" defense under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration because the administrative law judge (WCALJ) failed to address the elements of this defense. The WCAB rescinded the previous findings and returned the case for further proceedings, requiring the WCALJ to specifically address whether the personnel actions were lawful, nondiscriminatory, and in good faith, and if they substantially caused the injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric injuryLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Good faith personnel actionPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJPanel Qualified Medical ExaminerPredominant causeSubstantial cause
References
Case No. ADJ10221687
Regular
Nov 13, 2020

LEONORE MUNOZ vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer in four sentences: The Appeals Board reversed a Workers' Compensation Judge's decision, finding that the applicant's psychiatric injury was not substantially caused by lawful, nondiscriminatory, good faith personnel actions. While the applicant experienced distress from work-related events, including a counseling memo and an email announcing a meeting, the Board determined that the email was not a "personnel action" under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). Therefore, the employer's defense that the injury stemmed solely from such actions failed, making the psychiatric injury compensable. The Board rescinded the prior order and substituted a finding that the injury is compensable and not barred by the personnel action defense.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric InjuryGood Faith Personnel ActionLabor Code Section 3208.3(h)ReconsiderationCausationPQMEIndustrial StressorsCounseling MemoPersonnel Action
References
Showing 1-10 of 3,191 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