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. ADJ1357786 (RDG 0126731)
Regular
May 10, 2010

MARK JAMES vs. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY; PERMISSIBLY SELF-INSURED ADMINISTERED BY SEDGWICK 14627 ONTARIO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Pacific Bell's petition for reconsideration of an award to Mark James. The original award found James sustained a 100% permanent disability due to industrial melanoma, and Pacific Bell argued for apportionment to non-industrial causes. The Board affirmed the finding that the Agreed Medical Evaluator, Dr. Blau, was unable to determine the percentage of disability caused by non-industrial factors due to insufficient information. This inability to apportion, not a failure to consult, meant Pacific Bell failed to meet its burden of proof for apportionment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPacific Bell Telephone CompanyMark JamesMaintenance Splicing TechnicianMelanomaPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code Section 4663Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Dr. Robert Blau
References
Case No. ADJ9950339
Regular
Jan 05, 2017

JAMES GARZA vs. OREILLYS AUTO PARTS, CORVEL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied James Garza's Petition for Removal because it found the WCJ's determination that the orthopedic panel was correct was within the WCAB's jurisdiction. Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only when substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result, and reconsideration is an inadequate remedy. The WCAB was not persuaded that these conditions were met. Therefore, the Petition for Removal was denied.

Petition for RemovalMedical Unit PanelOrthopedic PanelJurisdictionSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary RemedyReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ6861829
Regular
Jun 13, 2012

BART JAMES JOHNSON vs. BEYETTE'S TREE CARE

This case involves a supplemental award of attorney's fees to Bart James Johnson's attorney, pursuant to Labor Code § 5801. The Court of Appeal denied the employer's petition for writ of review, finding no reasonable basis. Consequently, the case was remanded for attorney's fees. The applicant's attorney requested $3,500.00 for ten hours of work at $350 per hour related to the writ of review. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board deemed this fee reasonable and awarded it against the uninsured employer.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSupplemental Attorney's FeesLabor Code § 5801Petition for Writ of ReviewRemandReasonable Attorney FeesStipulationPetition for FeeAnswer to PetitionLegal Services
References
Case No. ADJ2585481 (SAL 0078232)
Regular
Apr 21, 2040

Robert James vs. FERMA CORPORATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves applicant Robert James seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) award. The original award found James sustained a permanent spinal injury causing total disability and requiring further medical treatment, and it also awarded attorney fees. James argued the attorney fee percentage was unauthorized and the disability payment rate was too low. However, the WCAB dismissed the petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed nearly ten years after the original award, far exceeding the jurisdictional 20-day filing deadline.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjurySpine InjuryPermanent DisabilityAttorney FeesLabor Code Section 5903Untimely FilingJurisdictional Time Limit
References
Case No. ADJ2824835
Regular
Jan 13, 2014

JAMES VANDERDOES vs. COUNTY OF KERN

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by a lien claimant. The Board has granted the petition to allow for a more thorough review of the factual and legal issues. This action is deemed necessary for the Board to achieve a complete understanding of the record and issue a just decision. Further proceedings may be ordered pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After ReconsiderationElectronic Adjudication Management SystemCounty of KernJames VanderdoesBakersfield District Office
References
Case No. ADJ9979717, ADJ9983551
Regular
Apr 15, 2020

James Wieboldt vs. County of San Diego

The Appeals Board rescinded two WCJ findings of industrial colon and vocal cord cancer, returning the cases for further proceedings. The Board found the medical opinions of Drs. Woolf and Berman lacked substantial evidence due to issues with causation, exposure details, and reliance on incorrect legal presumptions. While the applicant has the burden to prove industrial causation absent the cancer presumption, the Board determined the current medical record requires further development. The Board also noted discrepancies regarding the applicant's job titles and claimed periods of exposure that need clarification.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardJames WieboldtCounty of San DiegoColon CancerVocal Cord CancerIndustrial InjuryMedical OpinionSubstantial EvidenceLabor Code Section 3212.1Cancer Presumption
References
Case No. ADJ7021087
Regular
Aug 03, 2010

JAMES FLANAGAN vs. DOWNLY REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, YORK

In *Flanagan v. Downly Regional Medical Center*, the applicant sought reconsideration of a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB reviewed the entire record and the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge. Finding no error, the WCAB adopted the judge's report and denied the petition for reconsideration. The decision confirms the prior ruling against the applicant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ7021087James FlanaganDownly Regional Medical CenterYorkPetition for ReconsiderationReport and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeDecision After ReconsiderationDenied
References
Case No. ADJ1346707
Regular
Dec 17, 2008

James Clay vs. PINNACLE CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award to an applicant for $100\%$ permanent disability due to a shoulder and neck injury. While acknowledging the medical record appears to support the finding of total permanent disability, the Board rescinded the award to clarify the commencement date of permanent disability payments, which was eight months after the applicant reached a permanent and stationary status. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityFindings and AwardReconsiderationLabor Code Section 4061.5AMA GuidesOld Permanent Disability Rating SchedulePermanent and Stationary StatusCommutationIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ8079708
Regular
May 06, 2013

JAMES AZBILL vs. FATORS MOTORCYCLES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend a prior finding, affirming the claim is not barred by the statute of limitations. However, the Board reversed the finding that the applicant was entitled to the presumption of compensability under Labor Code section 5402(b). This presumption requires the filing of a DWC-1 claim form, which was absent in this case. The Board will return the matter to the trial level for further proceedings on deferred issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFators MotorcyclesState Compensation Insurance FundJames AzbillADJ8079708Opinion and OrderReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJStatute of Limitations
References
Case No. ADJ2967056 (LBO 0395577)
Regular
Nov 18, 2011

, Applicant, JAMES WHITCOMB (DECEASED), vs. , STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND,

This case concerns the dependents of a deceased correctional officer who sustained an industrial lung injury leading to his death. The applicant dependents seek reconsideration of an award, arguing penalties for delayed benefit payments were erroneously denied and that benefits should be calculated at the current maximum rate. The defendant employer argues death benefits should not be awarded under workers' compensation due to a potential CalPERS special death benefit, thus impacting attorney fees. The Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and remanded the case to the trial level for further proceedings on benefit rates, penalties, and attorney fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJames WhitcombState of CaliforniaDepartment of CorrectionsState Compensation Insurance FundADJ2967056Opinion and OrderReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial Injury
References
Showing 1-10 of 271 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