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. ADJ3818237
Regular
Dec 09, 2013

JOCELYN KLAUBER vs. PAYDEN & RYGEL, FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY C/O CHUBB GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued an order dismissing a Petition for Removal filed by the employer, Payden & Rygel, and its insurer, Federal Insurance Company. The employer had challenged a Minute Order from September 20, 2013, which set an expedited hearing concerning the procedural validity of their Utilization Review denial. This denial affected applicant Jocelyn Klauber's prescribed homecare assistance following spinal surgery. Ultimately, the employer withdrew their petition, leading to its dismissal by the WCAB.

Petition for RemovalWithdrawn PetitionDismissed PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardUtilization ReviewHomecare AssistanceCervical Spinal SurgeryLumbar Spinal InjuryPermanent Total DisabilityLifetime Medical Care
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Jocelyn L.

The court affirmed findings of sexual abuse by respondent Oscar N. and neglect by the respondent mother against Jocelyn, supported by a preponderance of the evidence due to excessive corporal punishment. The court's credibility determinations, which favored Jocelyn's testimony and discredited the mother's, were upheld. A negative inference was appropriately drawn from Oscar N.'s failure to testify, and Jocelyn's testimony via closed-circuit television was permitted due to concerns for her well-being. Additionally, findings of derivative abuse and neglect concerning Jennice were found to be warranted. The appellants' remaining arguments were considered and deemed unavailing by the concurring panel.

Sexual AbuseChild NeglectCorporal PunishmentCredibility DeterminationNegative InferenceClosed Circuit Television TestimonyDerivative AbuseFamily Court ActAppellate DivisionPreponderance of Evidence
References
9
Case No. SDO 355322
Regular
Feb 06, 2008

Jocelyn Dubbs vs. Abbott Vascular, ACE USA c/o MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a Finding and Award that determined applicant sustained an industrial injury to her right upper extremity. The Board clarified that the temporary disability rate in the award should be corrected to $626.35 per week to align with the Findings of Fact, despite the defendant's arguments regarding concurrent employment and average weekly earnings. The defendant's petition for reconsideration was denied as the Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report and recommendation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJocelyn DubbsAbbott VascularACE USASDO 355322Reconsideration DeniedClerical Error CorrectionIndustrial InjuryRight Upper ExtremityAverage Weekly Earnings
References
0
Case No. ADJ2941365 (BGN 0131581)
Regular
May 22, 2019

JOCELYN JOHNSON vs. COCA COLA BOTTLING COMPANY, KEMPER NATIONAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Jocelyn Johnson's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision that found no fraud in the procurement of earlier findings and awards. Johnson alleged an incorrect injury date, insufficient medical evaluation, and denial of due process. The Board found that Johnson failed to demonstrate extrinsic fraud, as the issues raised could and should have been litigated in prior proceedings or appeals. Therefore, good cause did not exist to reopen the 1996 and 2002 findings and awards.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFraudDate of InjuryAgreed Medical EvaluatorDue ProcessLabor Code Section 5803Continuing JurisdictionExtrinsic Fraud
References
11
Case No. ADJ156419
Regular
Feb 20, 2019

JOCELYN BOWEN vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a prior Independent Medical Review (IMR) decision that denied the applicant's Norco prescription. The Board found the IMR reviewer failed to consider all submitted medical records and prior IMR determinations, leading to plainly erroneous findings of fact. Specifically, the IMR reviewer incorrectly stated there was no documentation of functional improvement with Norco, despite such documentation being present. The case is remanded for a new IMR review by a different reviewer or organization.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndependent Medical ReviewUtilization ReviewPlainly Erroneous FindingsAdministrative DirectorLabor CodeMedical Treatment Utilization ScheduleNorcoPain ManagementOrthopedic Surgery
References
11
Case No. ADJ4406352
Regular
Jun 14, 2013

JOCELYN SWAIN vs. JAMES O. GREEN, EVELYN GREEN

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify attorneys' fees. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's findings on temporary and permanent disability, but amended the award. Attorneys' fees awarded under Labor Code section 4555 are payable in addition to the applicant's recovery when the employer fails to secure insurance. However, if the Uninsured Employers Benefit Trust Fund pays the benefits, attorneys' fees are payable out of the applicant's recovery.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilitySchedule for Rating Permanent DisabilitiesLabor Code Section 4555Attorneys' FeesUninsured Employers Benefit Trust FundReconsiderationFindings and Award
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Whidbee v. McDonald's Corp.

Plaintiffs Jocelyn Whidbee and Shirlene Tranquille, both African-American, sued their former employer, McDonald's Restaurant in Middletown, New York, and its owners, Ed and John Garzarelli, alleging employment discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and New York Executive Law §§ 296 and 297, and constructive discharge. The claims stemmed from alleged racially offensive comments made by a co-worker. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment, finding that the alleged harassment did not meet the severity or pervasiveness required for a hostile work environment claim, and that there was no causal link for individual liability against the owners. The court also dismissed the New York Human Rights Law claim due to prior administrative filings and the constructive discharge claim, as plaintiffs failed to demonstrate deliberately intolerable working conditions.

Employment DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRacial HarassmentSummary JudgmentConstructive DischargeSection 1981New York Executive LawAt-Will EmploymentCo-worker MisconductEmployer Liability
References
37
Showing 1-7 of 7 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