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. CV-23-2141
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Jorge Ferra

Claimant Jorge Ferra, a sound engineer, was injured in a motor vehicle accident while traveling for his employer. A toxicology screening showed he was legally intoxicated. The employer and carrier argued that intoxication was the sole cause, making the claim non-compensable under Workers' Compensation Law § 10 (1). The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed a WCLJ's decision, finding that the carrier failed to prove intoxication was the *sole* cause, as a third vehicle striking claimant's car also contributed to the accident. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that driving while intoxicated does not inherently constitute a deviation from employment, and the employer bears a heavy burden to overcome the statutory presumption that injuries were not *solely* due to intoxication.

Workers' CompensationIntoxication DefenseMotor Vehicle AccidentSole Cause of InjuryDeviation from EmploymentCompensabilityBlood Alcohol ContentAppellate ReviewStatutory PresumptionEmployer Liability
References
14
Case No. CV-22-2146
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Jorge Leon

Claimant Jorge Leon, a construction laborer, sought workers' compensation benefits for neck, back, shoulder, hip, knee, and ankle injuries sustained on November 5, 2021, after falling into a hole at work while carrying rebar. The employer and carrier controverted the claim, disputing notice and compensability. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge established the claim for neck and back injuries, which the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed, crediting the claimant's testimony. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding it was supported by substantial evidence and that the Board's credibility determinations were final.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryArising Out of EmploymentCourse of EmploymentNotice of InjuryWitness CredibilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewNeck InjuryBack Injury
References
7
Case No. CA 12-00576
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2012

JOHNSON, JOSHUA v. DEL VALLE, JORGE

Plaintiff Joshua Johnson sought damages for injuries sustained at work when co-employee Jorge Del Valle allegedly threw a baseball, striking Johnson's face. Del Valle moved for summary judgment, arguing workers' compensation was the exclusive remedy. The Supreme Court granted the motion, dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, reversed the order, denied the motion, and reinstated the complaint. The court found that a triable issue of fact existed regarding whether Del Valle's actions were within the scope of his employment, thereby challenging the applicability of the workers' compensation exclusivity provision.

Personal InjuryCo-employee LiabilityWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityScope of EmploymentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewTriable Issue of FactNegligenceWorkplace InjuryNew York Law
References
6
Case No. ADJ9606696
Regular
Oct 12, 2018

JORGE LOPEZ vs. VERIZON WIRELESS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Jorge Lopez's Petition for Reconsideration against Verizon Wireless. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's (WCJ) report and opinion, giving great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination of witnesses. No substantial evidence was presented to warrant overturning the WCJ's decision. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ credibility determinationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.substantial evidenceOpinion and Order DenyingADJ9606696Riverside District OfficeJorge LopezVerizon Wireless
References
1
Case No. ADJ7935519
Regular
Nov 04, 2014

JORGE RINCON vs. PACIFIC WHEY BAKING COMPANY, TRISTAR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Jorge Rincon's Petition for Reconsideration against Pacific Whey Baking Company and Tristar. The dismissal was primarily because the petition was untimely filed. Even if it had been timely, the Board would have denied it on the merits based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportDenied on MeritsAdministrative Law JudgeCase NumberSanta Ana District OfficePacific Whey Baking Company
References
0
Case No. ADJ6781238
Regular
Mar 08, 2013

JORGE MORA vs. CLP RESOURCES, INC., ESIS

This case involved a carpenter, Jorge Mora, who sustained an industrial injury to his left hand while employed by CLP Resources, Inc. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the WCJ's prior decision finding that the injury was proximately caused by CLP Resources' serious and willful misconduct. The WCAB also upheld the WCJ's determination that the serious and willful misconduct claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The defendant's petition for reconsideration was denied, affirming the original award of compensation and attorney's fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and willful misconductIndustrial injuryCarpenterLeft hand injuryStatute of limitationsCompromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJ Report and Recommendation
References
0
Case No. ADJ6486950; ADJ6490670
Regular
Nov 25, 2013

JORGE UBEDA vs. VERTIS COMMUNICATIONS, BROADSPIRE/CIGA

This case concerns Applicant Jorge Ubeda's Petition for Removal, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied. The Board adopted the findings of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), who found that while the objection to the Declaration of Readiness to Proceed might have been late, Applicant did not demonstrate prejudice. The key dispute centers on Applicant's refusal to provide a social security release for medical records, which the ALJ deemed a valid discovery issue that should be addressed before other benefit issues. The ALJ reasoned that Applicant's failure to respond to multiple requests for the release, rather than making a substantive objection, prevented Defendants from initiating formal action sooner.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedSocial Security ReleaseMedical RecordsObjection to DORAOE/COEContinuous TraumaDiscoveryMSC
References
0
Case No. ADJ14951750 (MF); ADJ15106978
Regular
Jul 07, 2025

JORGE ARMANDO GARAY SANCHEZ vs. BLAKE MCCLURE

Applicant Jorge Armando Garay Sanchez sought reconsideration of a Finding of Fact and Order (F&O) issued by a WCJ, which concluded he failed to prove industrial injuries on two separate dates. The Appeals Board granted the petition, finding that the defendant, Blake McClure, had admitted applicant's employment and failed to rebut the employment presumption. The Board rescinded the original F&O and substituted a new one, affirming that applicant claimed industrial injuries to his left knee, ankle, and foot on July 15, 2021, and to his head and neck on February 3, 2020, further noting the defendant was uninsured. The case has been returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinding of Fact and OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJIndustrial InjuryLeft KneeLeft AnkleLeft FootHead and NeckUninsured Employer
References
13
Case No. ADJ845263 (ANA 0397766)
Regular
Feb 19, 2015

JORGE LOPEZ vs. PIZZA HUT, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Jorge Lopez's Petition for Reconsideration. The petitioner withdrew their reconsideration request because the parties had reached a Compromise and Release agreement. This settlement rendered the reconsideration process moot.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseWCJ decisionapplicantdefendantPizza HutAce American Insurance CompanyGallagher BassettADJ845263
References
0
Case No. ADJ7583327
Regular
May 16, 2013

JORGE GRAIBE vs. CVS CAREMARK, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Jorge Graibe's petition for reconsideration against CVS Caremark and its insurer because the petition was unverified. Labor Code section 5902 requires verification, and despite notice of this defect and a reasonable opportunity to cure it, the petitioner failed to file a verification or provide a compelling explanation for its absence. The Board would have denied the petition on the merits as well, adopting the WCJ's reasoning.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationVerifiedLabor Code section 5902Lucena v. Diablo Auto BodySignificant Panel DecisionDefectCureCompelling reasonPrejudice
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 111 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