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. 2015-06-0257
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 24, 2015

Boyd, Rosemary v. Hewlett Packard Co.

The employee, Rosemary Boyd, appealed an interlocutory order denying her claim for workers' compensation benefits. She alleged a new injury or aggravation of a pre-existing right shoulder condition while typing at work for Hewlett Packard Co. The trial judge had denied benefits based on affidavits and documentary evidence without an evidentiary hearing. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial judge's decision, finding that the employee did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness given to the causation opinions of the authorized Concentra physicians. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationShoulder InjuryRotator Cuff TearPre-existing ConditionMedical CausationInterlocutory AppealAffirmanceRemandExpedited HearingPresumption of Correctness
References
2
Case No. 2015-06-0257
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 06, 2015

Boyd, Rosemary v. Hewlitt Packard Co.

Rosemary Boyd sought temporary disability and medical benefits for a right shoulder injury she claimed occurred on August 18, 2014, while working for Hewlett Packard. She had a history of prior shoulder surgeries and contended the current injury, a rotator cuff tear, was work-related and caused an anatomical change, an opinion supported by her surgeon, Dr. Downs. Hewlett Packard and its insurer, Old Republic Ins. Co., denied the claim, relying on opinions from authorized physicians, Dr. Reddy and Dr. Syed, who deemed the injury unlikely to be work-related. Workers' Compensation Judge Dale Tipps noted the presumption of correctness for the authorized physicians' opinions. The judge concluded that Ms. Boyd had not provided sufficient evidence from Dr. Downs to rebut this presumption, thus denying her claim for benefits at this time and scheduling an Initial Hearing.

Shoulder InjuryRotator Cuff TearPre-existing ConditionMedical CausationTemporary Disability BenefitsMedical BenefitsExpedited HearingRecord ReviewBurden of ProofPresumption of Correctness
References
3
Case No. 2015-05-0003
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 01, 2016

Hewlett, Angela v. SMX Staffing

Angela Hewlett, an employee of SMX Staffing, filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking additional medical treatment for an elbow injury sustained in a fall at work. The central legal issue was whether she was likely to establish that her injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of her employment. The Court considered the opinion of Dr. Coogan, the authorized treating physician, who stated her condition, severe bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, did not arise primarily from the work fall. Ms. Hewlett argued Dr. Coogan failed to properly diagnose her elbow condition and provided no contrary medical evidence. The Court found Ms. Hewlett did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness for Dr. Coogan's causation opinion and denied her request for medical benefits.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingMedical BenefitsElbow InjuryCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCausationPresumption of CorrectnessTreating Physician OpinionMedical EvidenceTennessee Bureau of Workers' Compensation
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coburn v. Hewlett Fire Department

The claimant, a volunteer firefighter and president of the Hewlett Fire Department, suffered a myocardial infarction after carrying heavy boxes for an installation dinner, an event authorized by the Board of Fire Commissioners. Initially, a referee awarded benefits under the Volunteer Firemen’s Benefit Law, a decision contested by the Hewlett Fire Department and the State Insurance Fund, who argued it was a social occasion. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the award, interpreting the event as an "inspection or review" and a "meeting" covered under the Volunteer Firemen’s Benefit Law § 5 (1) (e) and (f). The Appellate Division upheld the Board's determination, finding its interpretation of the statute to be reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationVolunteer FirefighterMyocardial InfarctionLine of DutyInstallation DinnerStatutory InterpretationVolunteer Firemen’s Benefit LawAppealsNassau CountyInjury
References
3
Case No. ADJ1049634
Regular
Jul 24, 2013

WOLFGANG PUSBACK vs. HEWLETT PACKARD, SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Applicant's Petition for Removal as untimely. The petition sought to reverse an order denying a change of venue from San Jose to Santa Rosa, but it was filed nearly six months after the original order. The WCAB noted that while venue petitions require specific justification, the applicant's filing deadline had long passed. The Board also requested the defense provide case documentation due to the destruction of the physical file.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueUntimely FilingWCAB Rule 10843Labor Code section 5501.6Order Denying MotionFuture Medical TreatmentDestroyed FileEAMSFindings and Award
References
0
Case No. ADJ1225430 (GOL 0091391)
Regular
May 21, 2009

Robert D. Taylor vs. Hewlett Packard, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award of physical therapy. The Board held that the prior award did not preclude the defendant from challenging subsequent requests for medical treatment through the Utilization Review (UR) process. Defendant argued that changed circumstances, supported by a UR physician's opinion citing ACOEM guidelines, justified challenging the current physical therapy request. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine the reasonableness of the requested treatment and the timeliness of the defendant's UR decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardUtilization ReviewACOEM guidelinesReasonable and Necessary Medical TreatmentRes JudicataCompromise and ReleaseCumulative TraumaSales Representative
References
2
Case No. ADJ3588877
Regular
May 17, 2011

LAURIE SHREFFLER vs. ELECTRONIC DATA SYSTEM, HEWLETT PACKARD, TRAVELERS WALNUT CREEK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration of a decision filed March 18, 2011. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and a need for further study of the factual and legal issues presented. The WCAB requires this to ensure a complete understanding of the record and to issue a just decision. All future filings are to be directed to the Office of the Commissioners in San Francisco.

ReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatutory time constraintsFactual issuesLegal issuesDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersApplicantDefendant
References
0
Case No. ADJ3588877 (SAC 0332526)
Regular
Jul 19, 2011

Laurie Shreffler vs. Electronic Data System, Hewlett Packard, Travelers Insurance Company

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision, the Appeals Board reversed the finding that the applicant sustained an industrial injury related to diabetes. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which favored Dr. Nishimura's medical opinion over Dr. Nacouzi's regarding the diabetes. While the award for temporary and permanent disability remains, the applicant is no longer entitled to industrial medical treatment for her diabetes. The decision otherwise affirmed the original award for injuries to the neck, low back, psyche, and irritable bowel syndrome.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardElectronic Data SystemHewlett PackardTravelers Insurance Companyindustrial injurylow backneckpsycheirritable bowel syndromediabetes
References
1
Case No. ADJ10387978
Regular
Aug 13, 2019

MELE LATU vs. HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE SERVICES, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves a denied petition for reconsideration regarding Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) benefits. The applicant settled her industrial injury claim for $937,166, then sought SIBTF benefits. The Board denied the petition because the applicant failed to prove a pre-existing "labor disabling" condition, which is a requirement for SIBTF eligibility even after statutory changes. Medical evidence indicated the applicant was asymptomatic and functional prior to her industrial injury, and any apportionment was to asymptomatic pathology, not a labor-disabling condition.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundSIBTFLabor Code section 4751labor disablingpermanent partial disabilityapportionmentSenate Bill 899SB 899asymptomatic pathologyEscobedo v. Marshalls
References
2
Case No. ADJ1776695 (STK 0194100)
Regular
Dec 28, 2015

LINDA PACKARD vs. SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH

This case concerns applicant Linda Packard's request for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision denying specific dental treatment, extraction of tooth 18 and a cantilever bridge. The WCAB denied reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that the requested treatment was not medically necessary due to the industrial injury. The dissenting commissioner argued that the jaw condition was encompassed within the initial finding of "head" injury and that the WCAB retained jurisdiction to enforce the prior award of further medical treatment. The dissent proposed granting reconsideration to find liability for jaw treatment and allow for utilization review of the specific procedure.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJindustrial injurytooth extractioncantilever bridgetemporomandibular jointLabor Code section 4610utilization review
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 22 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