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. ADJ9108595
Regular
Aug 19, 2014

Virginia Rosales vs. Tri State Employment Services/Kalifornia Business Staffing, Lumbermen's Underwriting Alliance

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, the applicant, Virginia Rosales, alleged a continuous trauma injury. The Board denied her Petition for Reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report. The WCJ found the applicant not credible, citing inconsistencies in her injury claims and potential motivation for filing after termination. Furthermore, the WCJ determined the medical evidence from Dr. Kohanim was not substantial because it was based on an inaccurate job description. Therefore, no industrial injury was established, and the applicant's request for a Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) was rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeCredibility FindingAOE/COESubstantial Medical EvidenceQME ExaminationLabor Code §4060Continuous TraumaJob Description
References
Case No. ADJ8376821
Regular
Jul 21, 2014

BRIGHT ONYENWE vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that Bright Onyenwe sustained his injuries arising out of and in the course of employment. The Board deferred to the WCJ's credibility determination regarding the applicant's testimony about a student's assault. The defendant failed to impeach the applicant's testimony or demonstrate that the WCJ's findings were unsupported by substantial evidence. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCABAOE/COECredibilityImpeachmentPanel QMESelf-defenseJROTC InstructorLos Angeles Unified School DistrictAdverse Inference
References
Case No. ADJ8223604
Regular
Nov 14, 2013

DEEANNA FOBBS vs. UC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Dee Anna Fobbs' petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's report and recommendations, finding that the applicant did not sustain an injury to her right knee arising out of and in the course of employment. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings and concluded that the overwhelming weight of the evidence supported the WCJ's decision. Applicant's claims of impeachment errors, improper denial of testimony, and adverse inference for destroyed evidence were rejected.

DEEANNA FOBBSUC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTERSEDGWICK CMSPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONDENIEDWCJ REPORTGARZA V. WORKMEN'S COMP. APPEALS BD.WITNESS STATEMENTSIMPEACHMENTADMISSIBILITY
References
Case No. ADJ7785257
Regular
Mar 30, 2015

JOHN HUTTMAN vs. SOLANO COUNTY PROBATION, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an adverse ruling for John Huttman, applicant, against Solano County Probation. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found Huttman to be an incredible witness. Key evidence included the applicant's prior medical history, the impeachment of his witness, and proof that the alleged injury report to a supervisor was impossible. Therefore, the Board upheld the denial of the petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.industrial causationadverse rulingdisputed claimwitness credibilityimpeached witnessjuvenile wards
References
Case No. ADJ7998608
Regular
Apr 27, 2018

BEATRIZ MORENO vs. RTJ HOME SWEET HOME, INC., a California Corporation, ROSALINDA GALO, TORINO JAVIER, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal seeking disqualification of the judge, clarifying that prior trial testimony can be used for impeachment in a new trial. The Board also rescinded the WCJ's order prohibiting such references. Defense counsel Mike Pincher was sanctioned $800 for abusive language towards the WCJ, as his conduct in pleadings and objections was deemed disrespectful and unprofessional. The Board found Pincher's objections lacked merit and compounded his misconduct by making further disrespectful accusations against the WCJ.

RemovalSanctionsAbusive LanguagePre-Trial Conference StatementImpeachment PurposesWCJPetition for RemovalReconsiderationDisqualificationLabor Code section 5813
References
Case No. 9420257 [MF]; 8802141 [2] 8802135 [3]
Regular
Nov 02, 2019

RICHARD GLASSMAN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant permanently and totally disabled. The defendant contended the Administrative Law Judge erred by relying on the applicant's vocational expert, psychiatric AME, and inadmissible reports, and making a determination contrary to *Fitzpatrick*. The Board found the ALJ's reliance on the vocational expert and AME was supported by evidence, and the applicant's credibility was not impeached. While an inadmissible report was considered for jaw injury, it was deemed inconsequential to the permanent disability rating. The Board found the decision was consistent with the facts and medical opinions presented.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPermanently Totally DisabledVocational ExpertAgreed Medical ExaminerPsychiatric AMETreating PhysicianLabor Code § 5903Admitted InjuryCombined Values
References
Case No. ADJ8161824
Regular
Feb 27, 2013

LILIAN CRUZ vs. SINCERE CARE SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the decision that found her claimed slip and fall injury not industrial. The administrative law judge found significant credibility issues with the applicant's testimony due to numerous inconsistencies with her own prior statements and medical records. Furthermore, no medical evidence was presented linking the applicant's diagnosed degenerative conditions to the alleged work incident. The court declined to disturb the original finding, upholding the WCJ's credibility determinations and the lack of industrial causation evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCredibilityMedical TreatmentSlip and FallDegenerative Disc DiseaseIndustrial InjuryBurden of ProofMedical-Legal Evaluation
References
Case No. ADJ8299618
Regular
Sep 24, 2013

MARIA LOPEZ vs. WESTERN PIZZA ENTERPRISES, THE HANOVER INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge's report, which found the applicant's testimony lacked credibility due to inconsistencies and admissions. The applicant's claims regarding the extent of her work duties and the cause of her injuries were contradicted by defense witnesses and medical records. The Board gave great weight to the ALJ's credibility findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeCredibilityGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Continuous TraumaRepetitive TraumaDelivery DriverMotor Vehicle AccidentsSpecific Injuries
References
Case No. ADJ802487
Regular
Oct 30, 2014

MANUEL GODINEZ vs. IDD PROCESS & PACKING, INC.; SUSAN and JEFFREY GUNN, substantial shareholders

This case involves an applicant, Manuel Godinez, seeking workers' compensation benefits for a back injury allegedly sustained on December 14, 2007. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the claim, finding the applicant did not sustain an injury arising out of and in the course of employment, a decision the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) adopted. The WCAB denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, giving great weight to the ALJ's credibility findings. The applicant's claim faced dismissal for lack of prosecution and later had credibility issues due to inconsistent testimony and medical records not supporting the claimed injury mechanism.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCABLabor Code § 5903Findings of FactCredibilityIndustrial InjuryCourse of EmploymentCausationMedical EvidenceDismissal of Claim
References
Case No. ADJ7018865
Regular
Jul 01, 2013

AMY NGOC NGO vs. HAI ONG, INC. dba T.N. JANITORIAL SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding that an applicant's injury was not compensable. The applicant, a janitor, claimed injury while assisting her supervisor with landscaping at the supervisor's private residence. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's findings, which found the applicant's testimony regarding being scheduled for work on the day of injury lacked credibility and was not corroborated. Furthermore, the applicant's off-duty activity at her supervisor's home did not provide any benefit to the employer, thus not falling within the course of employment.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeCredibilityLabor Code § 3202.5Preponderance of the EvidenceCourse of EmploymentOff-Premises InjurySpecial Mission ExceptionCommercial Traveler Doctrine
References
Showing 1-10 of 28 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