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. ADJ15834374
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

HARMINDER SINGH vs. SUNVIEW LOGISTICS, INC.; SPEED INTERMODAL; MANPREET SINGH; CLEAR SPRING INSURANCE

The case involves Harminder Singh, a truck driver, claiming a workers' compensation injury while employed by Sunview Logistics, Inc. and/or Manpreet Singh dba Speed Intermodal. The Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) initially found joint employment and joint and several liability between Sunview Logistics and Speed Intermodal. Defendant Speed Intermodal sought reconsideration, arguing a lack of substantial evidence for joint employment. The Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, concurring with the WCJ's findings of fact regarding joint employment, citing substantial documentary and testimonial evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSunview LogisticsSpeed IntermodalManpreet Singhjoint employmentjoint and several liabilitypetition for reconsiderationFindings and OrderLabor Code section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)
References
Case No. ADJ2635006 (STK 0206833)
Regular
Nov 01, 2010

SAMUEL B. JOHNSON, III vs. CHEVRON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order denying discovery requests was not a final order. The Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm justifying this extraordinary remedy. The Board affirmed the WCJ's discovery ruling as reasonable and returned the matter to the trial level. The applicant may seek reconsideration of a final order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJdiscovery requestsRequest for AdmissionsRequest for Authenticationfinal ordersubstantial prejudiceirreparable harm
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. ADJ3190591 (SFO 0510866) ADJ9088362 ADJ9524437
Regular
Nov 21, 2014

ISAIAH KACYVENSKI vs. OAKLAND RAIDERS; ACE USA Administered by ESIS; ST. LOUIS RAMS and GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY Administered by BERKLEY SPECIALTY UNDERWRITING MANAGER, LLC

This case concerns a workers' compensation award against the St. Louis Rams and the Oakland Raiders for an injured professional athlete. The Rams petitioned for reconsideration, arguing they were improperly included in a joint award based on stipulations they were not a party to, violating their due process rights. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the Rams' due process claim had merit. The award was amended to be solely against the Oakland Raiders, as the Rams had elected not to proceed and their employment liability was not established.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoint AwardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5500.5(c)Stipulations with Request for Awardcumulative injuryprofessional athletepermanent disabilitydue processexcess of WCJ's powers
References
Case No. ADJ8012651; ADJ8008848
Regular
Sep 01, 2015

MARCELA QUIRINO vs. MARMALADE CAFÉ, Permissibly SelfInsured, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to review sanctions imposed on lien claimants, specifically Dr. Rubanenko, Qualified Billing & Collections LLC (QBC), and its employee Diego Plasencia. The WCAB affirmed that sanctions and dismissal of lien claims were warranted due to Plasencia's unauthorized abandonment of a trial, which constituted bad faith and caused unnecessary delay. However, the WCAB rescinded sanctions against other lien claimants, finding insufficient evidence of proper notice. Ultimately, the WCAB ordered Dr. Rubanenko, QBC, and Plasencia jointly and severally to pay $2,500 each in sanctions, totaling $7,500, and affirmed the dismissal of the lien claims.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantsJoint Petition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardAttorney's feesSanctionsWCJBad faith actionsUnnecessary delayDue process
References
Case No. ADJ2488411 (RIV 0017588)
Regular
Jun 30, 2011

ROBERT DOODY vs. MERLI CONCRETE PUMPING COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

Defendant Merli Concrete Pumping Company petitioned for removal, arguing insufficient discovery time regarding the applicant's petition for third-party credit and restitution. However, prior to the Appeals Board ruling on the petition, the parties jointly requested and the judge granted a continuance off the trial calendar. Consequently, the defendant's petition for removal became moot. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition as moot.

Petition for RemovalThird-party CreditRestitutionDiscoveryOff CalendarMootWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPro Tempore JudgeContinuanceJoint Request
References
Case No. ADJ3656063 (SRO 0135622)
Regular
May 03, 2012

HARVEY JOHNSON vs. ASIEN'S APPLIANCE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Applicant sought removal of an order suspending action on a Compromise and Release (C&R) that was mistakenly filed. The Applicant argued the WCJ erred, as both parties agreed the C&R should be stricken to allow for voluntary arbitration, but the WCJ's pending order blocked this. The Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, finding no significant prejudice or irreparable harm as no action was taken on the C&R. The Board clarified that upon remand, parties can jointly withdraw the C&R or seek disapproval, then request arbitration.

Petition for RemovalOrder Suspending ActionCompromise and ReleaseVoluntary ArbitrationStriken from the recordSignificant prejudiceIrreparable harmJoint requestTrial levelStipulate to withdraw
References
Case No. ADJ1871643 (SDO 0291759)
Regular
Oct 23, 2017

JOSE GOMEZ vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION PAROLE & COMMUNITY SERVICES, Legally Uninsured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's award of medical treatment. The defendant's Utilization Review denial was deemed untimely because their Request for Information was served more than five business days after the initial request, excluding the day after Thanksgiving. The Board clarified that the day after Thanksgiving is considered a normal business day for UR purposes under Labor Code section 4600.4. Therefore, the defendant's untimely RFI did not extend the UR deadline, and the requested medical treatment was properly authorized.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardUtilization ReviewRequest for AuthorizationRequest for InformationTimelinessBusiness DayLabor Code Section 4600.4Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPrimary Treating Physician
References
Case No. ADJ7199986 ADJ7399845
Regular
Oct 03, 2011

ELMIRA SMITH vs. PACIFIC AUTISM CENTER FOR EDUCATION, TRI- STAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The applicant sought removal to challenge a finding that defendant's requested Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel was properly assigned. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the finding, and determined that *neither* panel was properly assigned. Both panel requests were found to be premature as they were made before the statutory 10-day period for agreeing on an Agreed Medical Evaluator had expired, plus an additional five days for mail service. This decision clarifies the timing requirements for QME panel requests following an unsuccessful attempt to select an AME.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Labor Code section 4062.2(b)WCAB Rule 10507Messele v. Pitco FoodsInc.Premature RequestPanel AssignmentMedical Unit
References
Case No. ADJ10229956
Regular
Aug 13, 2018

VIRGIL GRAY vs. ARENA FOOTBALL LEAGUE, SAN JOSE SABERCATS, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE, UNINSURED EMPLOYER BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case denies the defendants' petition for reconsideration of a finding of joint employment for an industrial knee injury. The applicant, Virgil Gray, was found to be a joint employee of both the Arena Football League and the San Jose SaberCats, despite receiving paychecks from the League. Evidence such as the San Jose SaberCats' direct control over the applicant's work, provision of equipment, and housing, supported the finding that both entities exercised the right to direct and control his activities. The Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision, finding the totality of the record supported joint employment.

joint employmentspecial employergeneral employerArena Football LeagueSan Jose SaberCatsZurich American InsuranceUninsured Employer Benefits Trust Fundprofessional athleteindustrial injuryleft knee
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,741 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