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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ4258585 (OXN 0130492) ADJ220258 (OXN 0130487)
Regular
Apr 17, 2018

ENRIQUE HERRERA vs. MAPLE LEAF FOODS, U.S. FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALEA NORTH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This notice informs parties that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) intends to admit its rating instructions and a disability rater's recommended permanent disability rating into evidence. The WCAB previously granted reconsideration for further study. Parties have seven days to object to the rating instructions or the recommended rating, with specific procedures for addressing objections. If no timely objection is filed, the matters will be submitted for decision thirty days after service.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPermanent Disability RatingDisability Evaluation UnitRating InstructionsRecommended Permanent Disability RatingJoint RatingReconsiderationObjectionRater Cross-ExaminationRebuttal Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ11368246
Regular
Mar 03, 2020

Marta Ubillus vs. One Stop Employment Services, LLC/Vensure Employer Services, Security National Insurance Company, State National Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration regarding the valuation of interpreter services. The WCAB adopted the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) report, which found that while the defendant did not present rebuttal evidence, the ALJ had substantial evidence to make a determination. The ALJ determined a market rate of $114.97 per hour but noted the lien claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence of the duration of services on most dates, preventing application of the market rate. Consequently, the statutory rate was applied for those services.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedLien ClaimantInterpreter ServicesMarket RateStatutory RateWCJ ReportSubstantial EvidenceFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ10138143
Regular
Sep 01, 2017

SHIRLEY BROWN vs. MERCY MEDICAL CENTER MERCED COMMUNITY CAMPUS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, amending a prior decision. The Board ruled that attorney's fees for the applicant's counsel should be based entirely on their reasonable hourly rate and hours worked, not a combination of hourly rate and a percentage of the recovery. This decision clarified that fees owed by an employer under Labor Code § 4064(c) for an unrepresented employee's attorney are determined by the reasonableness of hours and hourly rate, not the indemnity awarded. Consequently, the applicant's attorney was awarded $10,758.75.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAttorney's FeesHourly RatePercentage of RecoveryLabor Code § 4064Declaration of Readiness to ProceedStipulations with Request for AwardQuantum MeruitIndemnity
References
Case No. ADJ515169 ADJ620656
Regular
Oct 04, 2017

SERGIO CHAIREZ vs. CHEROKEE BINDERY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for PAULA INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's finding that \$13.75 per hour was an adequate rate for home healthcare services. The Board found insufficient evidence that the applicant's spouse performed services requiring a higher Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) rate. However, the case was removed to the Appeals Board to return the issue of applicant's attorney's fees to the trial level for further proceedings and decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationHome Healthcare RateLicensed Vocational NurseCatheterizationHourly RateStipulated AwardAttorney's FeesRemovalDecision After Removal
References
Case No. ADJ758842 (VNO 0559214)
Regular
Dec 17, 2010

JOHN PATCHETT vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for removal, affirming the WCJ's decision to vacate the submission. This action was based on the DEU evaluator's testimony, which revealed deficiencies in the AMEs' reports concerning the AMA Guides. The Board found the applicant waived any objection to this testimony by failing to object at trial, and that the evaluator's expert opinion was permissible per *Blackledge v. Bank of America*. Defendant's objection, though not styled as a motion to strike, sufficiently raised the issues leading to the vacation of the rating.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating SubmissionDEU evaluatorAMA Guidesagreed medical evaluators (AMEs)rating instructionssubstantial evidenceobjective factors of disabilitywhole person impairmentformal rating
References
Case No. ADJ4564984 (MON 0201538)
Regular
Apr 20, 2009

EdUARDO RODRIGUEZ (Deceased) RODRIGUEZ, Teresita (Wife) vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, USC MEDICAL CENTER, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address deficiencies in the original award for home health care services. The Board found a lack of substantial evidence supporting the necessity and duration of care provided by the deceased worker's wife, Teresita Rodriguez. Crucially, the WCJ failed to specify the basis for the awarded hours and hourly rate, and did not adequately address potential differences in rates over time or periods of hospitalization. The matter was returned to the trial level for further development of the record to determine the actual need for care, the precise number of hours, and appropriate rates, as well as to clarify the defendant's notice of the need for services.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardHome Health Care ServicesLien ClaimantAgreed Medical EvaluatorIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilitySelf-Procured Medical TreatmentRenal Failure
References
Case No. ADJ7415342
Regular
Jul 01, 2013

Maggie Davis vs. Kern Medical Center, County of Kern

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of Kern's Petition for Reconsideration regarding an award of attorney's fees. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to award applicant's attorney $770.00 based on 2.2 hours at $350.00 per hour for deposition representation. The Board found the defendant's arguments regarding the hourly rate, comparing it to physician and defense attorney rates, to be irrelevant and frivolous. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that applicant attorneys' fees are distinct from defense counsel's billing practices and established $350.00 per hour as reasonable for a Certified Workers' Compensation Specialist in the Bakersfield office.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code §5710Deposition Attorney's FeesHourly RateCertified SpecialistBakersfieldKern Medical CenterCounty of KernApplicant Attorney
References
Case No. ADJ4280040 (VNO 0557524)
Regular
Jun 09, 2010

CARLOS GUZMAN vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a supplemental attorney's fee award for applicant's counsel. The Court of Appeal denied the defendant's petition for writ of review and remanded for attorney's fees and costs. While the applicant's attorney requested $2100 based on six hours at $350/hour, the Board awarded $1500 based on six hours at $250/hour, considering the attorney's recent admission to the bar and lack of specialization. Costs were not awarded as they were not requested.

Supplemental Attorney's FeesLabor Code §5801Petition for Writ of ReviewReasonable Attorney's FeesHourly RateState Bar AdmissionCertified SpecialistWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardBarrett Business ServicesInc.
References
Case No. FRE 0131884
Regular
May 28, 2008

CARMEN E. SOLLARS vs. TARGET STORES

The Court of Appeal remanded this case for additional attorney's fees for applicant's counsel after the defendant's petition for writ of review was denied. While applicant's counsel requested $8,640 based on 28.8 hours at $300/hour, the Appeals Board reduced the award. The Board found the requested rate and hours excessive, awarding $2,500 based on 10 hours at $250/hour, considering the result, work performed, and difficulty.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Writ of ReviewAttorney's FeesLabor Code § 5801Court of AppealRemittiturSupplemental AwardAppellate WorkHourly RateReasonable Fees
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,794 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