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. ADJ10666000
Regular
Jun 04, 2018

JUANA ALEMAN vs. CITISTAFF SOLUTIONS, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The applicant, Juana Aleman, seeks reconsideration of a decision that denied her workers' compensation claim for cumulative injury. The appeals board granted reconsideration because the panel Qualified Medical Examiner's (QME) report lacked substantial evidence. Specifically, the QME's description of the applicant's job duties was inconsistent with testimony from both the applicant and her supervisor. Consequently, the board rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings, recommending the parties provide an accurate job description to the QME.

Petition for ReconsiderationPanel Qualified Medical Examiner (QME)Substantial EvidenceJob Description InaccuracyCumulative InjuryWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)Medical OpinionLabor CodeRestored to CalendarFindings Order Opinion
References
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. ADJ7456826 ADJ7507377
Regular
May 29, 2012

MARIA ARELLANO vs. ON SECOND THOUGHT DBA PENINSULA CLEANING administered by ARGO SELECT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied applicant Maria Arellano's petition for reconsideration of the judge's findings. The judge previously determined that Arellano did not sustain injury arising out of and in the course of employment for both specific and cumulative trauma claims. Applicant's argument that the judge erred by not considering the Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator's report as substantial evidence and by not developing the record on her job description was rejected. The Board found that the applicant failed to establish estoppel based on a disputed agreement to accept liability and that the PQME's opinion was not substantial evidence due to an inaccurate history.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedAOE/COESpecific Trauma InjuryCumulative Trauma InjuryPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator (PQME)Substantial EvidenceJob DescriptionEstoppelMinutes of Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ9869800
Regular
Jun 01, 2018

BOB PETTIT vs. VENTURA REGIONAL SANITATION DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) amended an earlier decision, affirming the termination of a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) and the requirement for a new QME panel due to the defendant's procedural violation. The defendant violated Labor Code section 4062.3(b) by submitting a job description to the QME without serving it on the applicant 20 days prior. While this was not deemed an ex parte communication, the WCAB agreed that a new QME was necessary to preserve the integrity of the medical-legal process. The order for attorney's fees under section 4062.3(h) was rescinded as it specifically applies to ex parte communications.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Labor Code section 4062.3ex parte communicationjob descriptionmedical-legal processattorney's feespetition for reconsiderationtermination of QMEsupplemental report
References
Case No. ADJ1039908 (RDG 0121430)
Regular
Nov 07, 2008

AYON vs. CLIFF'S AUTO CENTER, Uninsured, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant is entitled to a Job Displacement Voucher. The applicant sustained an industrial injury causing permanent disability and did not return to work for the defendant within 60 days of temporary disability termination. Therefore, the applicant is eligible for a nontransferable voucher of up to $6,000 for educational retraining or skill enhancement, as defined by Labor Code § 4658.5.

Job Displacement VoucherUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundStipulated AwardPermanent DisabilitySupplemental Job Displacement BenefitLabor Code § 4658.5Nontransferable VoucherEducation-Related RetrainingSkill EnhancementVocational Return to Work Counselor
References
Case No. SJO 0264010
Regular
Feb 11, 2008

CIPRIANO LOMOTAN vs. GE INFRASTUCTURE SECURITY, MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES

In *Lomotan v. GE Infrastructure Security*, the Appeals Board vacated a judge's notice of intention to impose sanctions and a related job analysis order. This decision followed a Commissioner's Conference where the parties reached a compromise and release resolving all issues, including vocational rehabilitation benefits. The Board found no basis for sanctions and determined the job analysis issue was moot due to the settlement.

RemovalAppeals BoardSupplemental OrderSanctionsWCJCommissioner's ConferenceCompromise and ReleaseVocational RehabilitationSupplemental Job Displacement BenefitsJob Analysis
References
Case No. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Case No. ADJ10548329
Regular
Jan 04, 2019

JOSE CORONA vs. KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration to further examine the factual and legal issues. The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior decision regarding an injury sustained while participating in a federal jobs program. Key issues on appeal include the calculation of temporary and permanent disability, and whether penalties or sanctions were warranted for the employer's actions concerning a job displacement voucher. The WCAB will issue a decision after further review.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJose CoronaKern High School DistrictPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code §5813Labor Code §5814Supplemental Job Displacement VoucherTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityNational Farmworker Jobs Program
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. ADJ4638227 (LAO 0848464), ADJ519038 (LAO 0848465)
Regular
Oct 18, 2010

TINA ROBINSON vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award based on the defendant's argument that the applicant's permanent disability rating was incorrect. The Board found the record underdeveloped regarding the applicant's actual job duties as a traffic officer, which is crucial for determining the proper occupational group and variant under the 2005 Schedule. The case is returned to the trial level for further evidence and a new decision on the permanent disability issue.

ADJ4638227ADJ519038CITY OF LOS ANGELESTINA ROBINSONOccupational Group 4902005 Schedule for Rating Permanent Disabilitiesoccupational variantpermanent disability ratingJoint Findings and AwardReconsideration
References
Showing 1-10 of 266 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