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. ADJ4369942 (VNO 0550802) ADJ7224090; ADJ6904832
Regular
Oct 11, 2010

JIM WIGHT vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has denied the applicant's, Jim Wight's, Petition for Reconsideration in this case against the County of Los Angeles and Intercare Insurance Services. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in their report. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration is officially denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDenying ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgePetition for ReconsiderationCounty of Los AngelesIntercare Insurance ServicesADJ4369942VNO 0550802ADJ7224090ADJ6904832
References
0
Case No. ADJ784406 (FRE 0235717) ADJ1582511 (FRE 0243418)
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

ALTON TALLEY vs. MARK ONE CORPORATION, NBJ/ELNESS CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an arbitration decision regarding medical expense allocation. The decision relied on Dr. Baker's opinion that the December 12, 2006 injury, insured by Intercare, was primarily responsible for treatment expenses between that date and December 10, 2008. The petitioner argued Dr. Baker's report was not substantial evidence and that Dr. Murphy's report should prevail. However, the Board adopted Dr. Baker's report, noting Dr. Murphy's own report largely concurred with its findings for the disputed period.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDALTON TALLEYMARK ONE CORPORATIONNBJ/ELNESS CONVALESCENT HOSPITALINTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICESRICHARD G. BAKERM.D.DR. MURPHYSUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCEMEDICAL OPINION
References
0
Case No. ADJ1143803 (OXN 0128653) ADJ2709854 (OXN 0142376)
Regular
Nov 01, 2011

SALVADOR PAZ vs. MARTINEZ PAINTING & WALL COVERING, MB PAINTING, CIGA, for CREDIT GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INTERCARE, CIGA for UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY, INTERCARE, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, ACE USA

This case involves a painter, Salvador Paz, who sustained cumulative and specific injuries to his back, shoulder, wrist, neck, and foot. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied petitions for reconsideration from State Farm, CIGA, and the applicant. The Board upheld the original findings, which apportioned permanent disability at 72% to the specific injury (CIGA via Credit General) and 28% to the cumulative trauma (ACE USA and State Farm). Liability for temporary disability was also divided, and State Farm's arguments regarding an unequal division and due process were rejected.

CIGAState Farmcumulative injuryspecific injuryapportionmenttemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityvocational expertPetition for ReconsiderationCredit General Insurance
References
1
Case No. ADJ3687516
Regular
Jan 26, 2012

RAMONA ANAYA, JUAN JOSE GONZALEZ, JESUS CERVANTES, JULIE ANN CABEZA, WALTER CRABTREE vs. PORT HUENEME UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, J. M. SMUCKERS, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES, AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC., AIG DOMESTIC CLAIMS, INC., GHL ENTERPRISES, CIGA, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., PAULA INSURANCE COMPANY, MARY HEALTH OF THE SICK, REDISED INSURANCE, CRAWFY AND COMPANY, M.R. AUTOMOTIVE, CIGA, Administrative inTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, HIH AMERICA COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Attorney M. Francesca Hannan's request for a waiver of fees or a payment plan for reporter's transcripts. Hannan sought the transcripts to support allegations of bias by a Workers' Compensation Judge and claimed financial hardship and limited time for preparation. The Board found no legal basis for the fee waiver or payment plan under applicable rules and statutes, though it affirmed Hannan's right to obtain the transcripts upon payment.

WCABPetitionReporter's TranscriptFee WaiverPayment PlanGovernment Code 68632Administrative Director Rule 9990Appeals Board Rule 10740AnayaLien Trial
References
0
Case No. ADJ10061166
Regular
Oct 02, 2015

Lorenzo Lujan vs. RAMCO, INTERCARE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, overturning a prior order that denied his request to change venue. The applicant resides in Santa Barbara County, where his injury occurred and his attorney's office is located, and he properly designated Santa Barbara for venue. Despite the Workers' Compensation Division's website listing Santa Barbara as a "Satellite office," the Board found it provides the same essential services as other district offices. Therefore, venue was transferred to the Santa Barbara District Office, as required by Labor Code section 5501.5(a).

Petition for RemovalOrder Denying Change of VenueLabor Code section 5501.5applicant's residencelocation of injuryattorney's principal place of businessSanta Barbara District OfficeSan Luis Obispo District OfficeSatellite officemandatory venue
References
1
Case No. ADJ9214889
Regular
Dec 08, 2014

JIE BAI vs. PEBBLE BEACH, INTERCARE

This case involves applicant Jie Bai's petitions for reconsideration and removal stemming from two separate orders by the Workers' Compensation Judge. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both petitions, adopting the judge's reasoning. Reconsideration was denied regarding sanctions imposed on applicant's attorney for a late appearance, finding the attorney's tardiness and lack of excuse justified the sanction. Removal was denied regarding a change of venue to Salinas, as the judge found good cause based on the applicant's residence, injury location, and logistical convenience, despite the applicant's counsel's objections.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Imposing SanctionsOrder Changing VenueWorkers' Compensation JudgeLabor Code §5813Title 8CCR §10561Failure to Appear
References
0
Case No. ADJ4631701
Regular
Oct 19, 2012

ROCIO SALINAS vs. TUTOR & SALIBA, INTERCARE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's previous decision in the case of Salinas v. Tutor & Saliba. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision. This order is not a final decision on the merits, and parties retain the right to seek reconsideration of the future WCJ decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRescinded DecisionFurther ProceedingsWCJ DecisionTutor & SalibaIntercareADJ4631701OAK District OfficeOpinion and Order
References
0
Case No. ADJ8291111
Regular
Feb 08, 2016

MALIA ESTEBAN vs. COUNTY OF MONTEREY, INTERCARE

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: The Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, which sought to overturn the Mandatory Settlement Judge's order closing discovery and setting the case for trial. The Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm to the applicant and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The applicant's contention that closing discovery denied due process was rejected, as the trial judge can develop the record and hear evidence on disputed issues like alleged consequential injuries. All issues raised by the applicant are preserved for the trial judge's determination.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceClosure of DiscoveryDue ProcessIrreparable HarmReconsiderationCumulative InjuryQualified Medical EvaluatorMedical ReportsPermanent and Stationary
References
2
Case No. ADJ7324743
Regular
Sep 13, 2013

DIANA GARCIA vs. USA STAFFING INC., INTERCARE

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claim. The lien claimant, Dr. Ashden, failed to pay the required lien activation fee before the commencement of the lien conference. The WCAB found this dismissal mandatory under statute and precedent, and ignorance of the law was not a valid excuse. Therefore, the lien was dismissed for failure to comply with the statutory fee requirement.

Lien activation feePetition for ReconsiderationFigueroa en bancCalifornia Code of Regulations title 8 section 10848Lien claimantOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 4903.06Lien conferenceCompromise and Release
References
2
Case No. ADJ3972516 (LBO 0327160)
Regular
Sep 09, 2013

GINO MENDOZA vs. DISTINCTIVE DRYWALL, INTERCARE INSURANCE

Here's a summary for a lawyer in four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the dismissal of lien claimant Advanced Care Specialists' lien. The dismissal occurred due to failure to pay the lien activation fee and appear at a conference. This failure was excused because Advanced Care's representative, Innovative Medical Management, Inc., was not properly served notice of the hearing, violating regulatory requirements for service on agents of record. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings concerning the lien.

Lien activation feeLien conferencePetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportService of noticeAgent of recordInnovative Medical ManagementEAMS ADJ fileLabor Code section 4903.06(a)(4)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10510
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 250 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