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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a denial of workers' compensation benefits, which was based on the finding that his claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board affirmed the denial, concluding that the applicant's job abandonment led to a termination prior to the filing of his claims. The Board also determined that the employer properly denied both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating a presumption of compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeApplicantDefendantRalphs Grocery CompanySecurity GuardIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ9725488
Regular
Nov 13, 2015

Norris Hollie vs. Management Training Corporation, Zurich American Insurance Company, ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration for applicant Norris Hollie, upholding a finding that his right knee injury on April 27, 2014, did not arise out of or occur in the course of his employment. The Board agreed that Hollie's participation in a continuing medical education program, while necessary to maintain his license, was not a reasonable expectation of his employment as a physician. There was no evidence of employer mandate, knowledge, or encouragement of this specific off-duty educational activity. Therefore, the injury sustained during this program was not deemed industrial.

Continuing educationMedical license renewalOff-duty activityReasonable expectancy of employmentCourse of employmentArising out of employmentIndustrial injuryPetition for reconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJ Report
References
Case No. ADJ271398 (SFO 0505138)
Regular
Jun 09, 2009

Fernando Martinez vs. D.H. SMITH COMPANY, INC., ICW GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration and rescinded the original denial of benefits. The Board found that the applicant's injuries sustained in a vehicle collision arose out of and occurred in the course of his employment, despite his unlicensed driving contrary to employer instructions. The Court held that performing an authorized activity in an unauthorized manner does not remove the injury from the course of employment when the employer provides transportation to a job site. The Board denied the defendant's petition, affirming that the "going and coming rule" did not bar compensation in this instance.

going and coming rulescope of employmentcourse of employmentarising out of employmentemployer provided transportationunauthorized mannermaterial deviationpublic highwayincreased riskLabor Code section 3600
References
Case No. ADJ7041104
Regular
Jun 18, 2013

James Stanfield vs. Solid Rock Ranch School, Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely. The applicant failed to file the petition within the statutory 25-day deadline after the March 25, 2013 Findings and Order. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report, which found the applicant's injury did not arise out of and occur in the course of employment. Specifically, the applicant was engaged in a personal business venture, not employer-contemplated duties, at the time of the tractor accident.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationuntimelyLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013Findings and OrderReport and Recommendationadministrative law judgeinjury arising out of and occurring in the course of employmentAOE/COE
References
Case No. ADJ6655702
Regular
Mar 18, 2010

GERICK CATUGDA vs. WINKLEBLACK CONSTRUCTION, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY c/o APPLIED RISK SERVICES

This case concerns whether the "going and coming rule" bars applicant's workers' compensation claim for injuries sustained during his commute. The defendant argued the rule applied, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied their petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's finding that the applicant's employment required him to have transportation for multiple job sites, creating an exception to the rule. This decision aligns with established precedent, where transportation necessity for the employer's benefit removes the commute from the rule's exclusion.

Going and coming ruleindustrial injuryconstruction laborerhead injurybrain injurypsyche injuryspine injuryribs injurypelvis injuryarms injury
References
Case No. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ2380588 (OXN 0148045)
Regular
Jul 11, 2011

Dann Shubin vs. Southwest Airlines; Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered by CAMBRIDGE PASADENA

This case concerns a pilot injured in a car accident while on a mandatory rest period after completing flights at his domicile airport. The defendant airline argued the injury was not compensable under the "going and coming" rule, as the pilot was on his own time and not engaged in employer duties. The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's finding, determining the pilot's release at his domicile airport marked the end of his employment-related travel. The Board concluded the pilot was not on a special mission or acting as a commercial traveler, thus his injury did not arise out of and occur in the course of employment.

Domicile airportGoing and coming ruleReserve availability periodReserve rest periodSpecial missionCommercial traveler exceptionIndustrial injuryCompensable injuryCourse of employmentArising out of employment
References
Case No. ADJ3512142 (MON 0288509)
Regular
Jan 12, 2009

JOSE LUIS LARA vs. BRATIFF HOME CORP. dba METRO DINER and SCOTT BROFFMAN as substantial shareholder; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFIT TRUST FUND

The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's finding that the applicant was an employee of Metro Diner on the date of injury, concluding that he was an independent contractor.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBratiff Home Corp.Metro DinerScott BroffmanUninsured Employers Benefit Trust FundADJ3512142MON 0288509Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationAdministrative Law Judge
References
Showing 1-10 of 9,656 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