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. ADJ9724680
Regular
Sep 17, 2018

JAIME RAMIREZ LEON vs. PEOPLEASE/FTU, NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE

The applicant sought reconsideration of an award denying temporary disability, permanent disability, and further medical care for a right shoulder injury. The applicant argued the primary treating physician's report lacked substantial evidence due to an inadequate history and exam, and the WCJ erred in not relying on the PQME's report. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to develop the record, specifically regarding whether the primary treating physician reviewed an MRI prior to her report. The original award was rescinded, and the matter was returned for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact Award and OrderAdministrative Law JudgePrimary Treating PhysicianPQMESubstantial EvidenceMedical ReportInadequate HistoryInadequate Medical Exam
References
Case No. ADJ1715257
Regular
Dec 10, 2010

BYRON BREAULT vs. F MCLINTOCKS SALOON, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding the record inadequate to support the finding of 100% permanent disability. The Board noted due process concerns due to the inadequate record and the WCJ's lack of specific evidentiary support for the decision. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to create a proper record and address vocational evidence concerning earning capacity. The WCJ must ensure all evidence is formally offered and ruled upon, and the decision must be based on specific evidence, not personal opinion.

Petition for ReconsiderationGood Cause to ReopenPermanent Disability RatingVocational Rehabilitation ExpertDue ProcessInadequate RecordSub Rosa VideoSubstantial EvidenceTotal Loss of Earning CapacityFuture Earning Capacity
References
Case No. ADJ3376571 (VNO 0502169)
Regular
Aug 28, 2012

JOSE LUEVANOS vs. CPE STAFF INC., GUIMARRA VINEYARDS, AMS STAFFING LEASING; LIBERTY MUTUAL and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND; CNA CLAIMS PLUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration because it was filed **untimely**, exceeding the 20-day statutory limit plus 5 days for mailing. Additionally, the petition was deemed **inadequate** due to an unsigned verification, failing to meet the requirements of Labor Code section 5902. Therefore, the Board ordered the dismissal of the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyLien ClaimantFindings and OrdersLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013VerificationInadequateLabor Code section 5902Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ3859727 (EUR 038613)
Regular
Jan 30, 2012

ANDREW KOCKRITZ vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The original award found a low back injury with subsequent psychiatric disability, totaling $58\%$. Although a typographical error listed the disability as $56\%$, the dollar amount awarded was correct for $58\%$. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was filed nine months after the decision, exceeding the 25-day filing limit. The Board noted that the trial judge can correct the clerical error upon return of the matter.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDpro perSupplemental Findings and Awardheavy equipment mechaniccompensable consequencepsychiatric disabilitystipulations with request for awardtypographical errorclerical errorinadequate benefits
References
Case No. ADJ7264915
Regular
Jul 15, 2013

ANA GONZALES vs. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

This case involves an applicant who sustained industrial psychiatric injury but whose orthopedic claims were denied due to insufficient medical evidence. The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to present substantial medical evidence of industrial causation for her orthopedic complaints. A dissenting commissioner argued that the primary medical evaluator's report was deficient and lacked substantial evidence, warranting further development of the record on orthopedic injuries and other claims. The dissent emphasizes the Board's duty to ensure substantial justice, suggesting it should have ordered further investigation on the denied orthopedic issues.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Orderindustrial injurypsychelow backneckright shoulderright wristright elbow
References
Case No. ADJ1531269
Regular
Dec 30, 2008

DANNY L. GIBBEL vs. BUILD 4-U WELL.COM, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the applicant's petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and removal was denied as an inadequate remedy.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightInterlocutory OrderRemovalWCJ Report and RecommendationSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmInadequate RemedyWCAB
References
Case No. ADJ6859530
Regular
Oct 16, 2012

ISSA FARRAJ, Deceased FATEN FARRAJ, Widow, vs. LDI TRUCKING; REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY Administered By BHHC BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as it sought review of non-final interlocutory orders and was skeletal. The Board also denied the petition for removal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and removal were denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDISSA FARRAJLDI TRUCKINGREDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTYBHHC BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIESPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONDISMISSINGNON-FINAL INTERLOCUTORY ORDERSSKELETAL PETITIONREMOVAL
References
Case No. ADJ8167149
Regular
Oct 19, 2012

KATRINA SENTIERI vs. PET SMART, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order dismisses the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the applicant failed to properly file it. The Board also denied the applicant's request for removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from denying removal or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, the petition was dismissed and removal was denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONDISMISSEDDENY REMOVALSUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICEIRREPARABLE HARMINADEQUATE REMEDYPETITIONERACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANYSEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES
References
Case No. ADJ4447791 (SDO 0259860)
Regular
Sep 12, 2014

HARRY PIFER vs. LA MESA APPLIANCE COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petitioner's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a final order that determined substantive rights. The Board also denied removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted. The petitioner failed to demonstrate that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Lastly, supplemental filings were rejected as not considered.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightLiabilityWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationSubstantial Prejudice
References
Case No. ADJ8664771
Regular
Sep 20, 2013

ODELL HILL vs. ALAMEDA COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT, SEDGWICK CMS

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board denied the Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration and dismissed their request for removal. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm to justify removal. The Applicant failed to demonstrate that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was denied, and removal was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissing RemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmInadequate RemedyFinal DecisionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationAlameda County Probation Department
References
Showing 1-10 of 494 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