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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. SJO 0237342
Regular

LINDA ONTIVEROS vs. SAVERS STORES, ZURICH AMERICA INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's original decision. The WCAB clarified its judicial authority and the role of WCJs in delegating those powers. Specifically, the Board ordered a correction to the heading of the WCJ's report to accurately reflect the "Workers' Compensation Appeals Board" as the decision-making body.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJJudicial AuthorityOriginal JurisdictionLab. CodeCal. Code RegsSan Jose District OfficeAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. GRO 0021432
Regular
Apr 28, 2008

Theodore Maiso vs. State of California, Department of Mental Health, State Compensation Insurance Fund, State Contract Services

This case involves a petition for reconsideration by applicant Theodore Maiso against the State of California, Department of Mental Health. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report and reasoning. The Board also corrected a technicality by ordering the substitution of "State of California, Division of Workers' Compensation, Workers' Compensation Appeals Board" in place of "State of California, Division of Workers' Compensation" in the WCJ's decision headings to accurately reflect the judicial authority.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDTheodore MaisoState of California Department of Mental HealthLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundAdjusting AgencyOrder Denying ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeJudicial AuthorityOriginal Jurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ2904305 (GOL 0095697) ADJ1827151 (GOL 0095698)
Regular
Aug 02, 2010

GUADALUPE CARRILLO vs. SAN ANTONIO VILLAGE HOA, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration regarding a disallowed lien balance of $9,349.46. The claimant, a doctor, failed to obtain required written authorization for work hardening services billed under CPT Code 97545. Despite a claim of verbal authorization and a general request for multiple modalities, the Board found the lack of specific written authorization for the disputed services to be determinative. Therefore, the administrative law judge's disallowance of the lien balance was upheld.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseWork hardeningWork conditioningCPT Code 97545Prior authorizationVerbal authorizationWritten authorization
References
Case No. MON 0325089 MON 0325090
Regular
Oct 05, 2007

NORA MEDEARIS vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case concerns the denial of an applicant's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The applicant sought further temporary disability benefits beyond the 104-week limit imposed by Labor Code § 4656(c)(1). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, finding the applicant failed to prove equitable estoppel against the defendant's application of the statutory limit, despite the defendant's initial refusal to authorize shoulder surgery. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the applicant did not demonstrate reliance on any conduct by the defendant that prevented her from timely pursuing authorization for the surgery.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNora MedearisCounty of Los AngelesPermissibly Self-InsuredMON 0325089MON 0325090Opinion and Order Denying Petition for ReconsiderationInterim Joint Findings and AwardCentral Services TechnicianIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ7735518 ADJ7735519 ADJ7735513 ADJ7735501 ADJ7735502 ADJ7736429 ADJ7736449 ADJ7735498 ADJ7098593 ADJ7735514
Regular
Jul 29, 2014

Marialaine Tabak vs. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration regarding a dispute over medical treatment authorization. The core issue was whether a Medical Provider Network (MPN) could restrict treatment to specific office locations of a listed physician. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the defendant school district properly denied authorization for treatment at an unauthorized location of an MPN physician. The MPN's explicit listing stated providers were in-network only at designated locations, and this contractual limitation was upheld. Therefore, treatment outside the approved location was at the applicant's own expense.

Medical Provider NetworkMPNPhysician locationAuthorizationSelf-procureGeographic limitExclusive rightContractual limitationsEmployer's obligationAdministrative Director's Rule
References
Case No. OAK 335190
Regular
Feb 26, 2008

ROBERT HAMANN vs. CHEVRON OCIP (CB&I CONTRACTORSSUBCONTRACTOR)

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, overturning the WCJ's order to produce documents and a privilege log. The Board amended the order, stating the defendant is not required to produce documents previously served on the applicant, provided proof of service can be demonstrated. The Appeals Board also corrected the heading on the WCJ's report to reflect the proper judicial authority.

Petition for RemovalSubpoena Duces TecumPrivilege LogAttorney-Client PrivilegeMotion to QuashWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJDivision of Workers' CompensationRemovalReconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ10896105
Regular
Mar 22, 2018

MICHAEL GHATTAS vs. O'REILLY AUTO PARTS, SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY COMPANY

This case concerns whether an employer must authorize requested medical treatment for a denied workers' compensation claim. The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding its prior decision. The Board concluded that the employer's timely denial of the claim under Labor Code section 5402 terminated their responsibility to authorize medical treatment. Therefore, the employer was not obligated to submit the physician's request for authorization (RFA) to utilization review despite it being pending when the denial was issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and Order DenyingDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of Fact Award and OrderRequest for AuthorizationUtilization ReviewLabor Code Section 5402Claim DenialMedical Treatment Authorization
References
Case No. ADJ9823935, ADJ9088024
Regular
May 20, 2016

LE VAN vs. FEDEX OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES, GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted FedEx's petition for reconsideration but ultimately affirmed the original order finding treatment by Monrovia Memorial Hospital reasonable and necessary. The Board clarified that even if the cervical spine was not explicitly pled as an injured body part, FedEx authorized the treatment and failed to properly rescind that authorization. Therefore, the lien claimant is entitled to payment for the services rendered.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Orderlien claimantMonrovia Memorial Hospitalcervical spineDr. Wilkercervical surgeryobjection letterprimary treating physician
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,352 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