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. ADJ3682964 (ANA 0393581) ADJ2308886 (ANA 0399397)
Regular
Dec 12, 2008

KARLA ORNELAZ vs. ALBERTSON'S INC., Permissibly Selfinsured, Administered by SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the employer's offer of modified work was timely. The Board ruled that the 60-day period to offer work under Labor Code § 4658(d) begins when the employer is served with notice of the employee's permanent and stationary status. Furthermore, the Board held that the five-day mailing extension under Code of Civil Procedure § 1013 applies to this notice, thus entitling the employer to a 15% decrease in permanent disability indemnity.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAlbertson's Inc.Specialty Risk ServicesInc.Karla OrnelazLabor Code §4658(d)(2)Labor Code §4658(d)(3)(A)permanent and stationarymodified workalternative work
References
Case No. ADJ8561000
Regular
Dec 06, 2018

KARLA CANADA vs. GELBART & ASSOCIATES, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves applicant Karla Canada's workers' compensation claim for back, gastrointestinal, psychiatric, sleep disorder, and headache injuries. The Appeals Board amended the original award, deferring issues of temporary total disability and a Labor Code section 4658 increase for further development. The Board found Dr. Fruchtbaum's report substantial evidence for temporary disability from September 24, 2012, to February 12, 2013, but rejected Dr. Trimble's reports due to factual inaccuracies. The matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings regarding the employer's employee count and the section 4658 increase.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationInjury AOE/COEPsychiatric InjurySleep DisorderHeadachesTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent DisabilityLabor Code Section 4658Substantial Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ1082547 (LBO 0311990), ADJ3651061 (LBO 0321320)
Regular
Nov 17, 2017

KARLA NEAL vs. J. PAUL GETTY TRUST; ESIS CENTRAL WC CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Karla Neal's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) decision. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination based on observing the applicant's demeanor during testimony. The applicant's claims of worsening industrial injuries and newly developed psychiatric injury were not supported by substantial evidence or raised appropriately at trial. The WCJ found the applicant lacked credibility, presenting inconsistent histories and making disparaging accusations against medical examiners.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)orthopedic injuriespsychiatric injurycumulative traumapro persubstantial evidenceindustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ6467603
Regular
Apr 05, 2011

TOODY CLITES-PORTER vs. COUNTY OF KERN, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision, the applicant sustained industrial injury to her cardiovascular system. The defendant employer's offer of regular work was found tardy by the WCJ, resulting in a 15% increase in permanent disability payments. However, on reconsideration, the Board amended the decision, finding the employer entitled to a 15% **decrease** in permanent disability payments. This was based on the employer making a timely offer of regular work within a reasonable time after receiving the permanent and stationary report, aligning with the statute's purpose of returning injured employees to work. The matter was returned to the trial level for recalculation of permanent disability indemnity and attorney's fees.

Permanent and stationary dateLabor Code section 4658(d)tardy offer of regular work15 percent decreasepermanent disability paymentsAdministrative Director Rule 10117(b)Ornelaz v. Albertson'sInc.Audiss v. City of Rohnert ParkAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)
References
Case No. ADJ9186134
Regular
Oct 01, 2019

KARLA SARABIA vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because the order to replace a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) was not a final order. The Board also denied the applicant's petition for removal, adopting the judge's report which found no basis for removal. The applicant sought to challenge the replacement of a QME, alleging prejudice and irreparable harm. The Board found no substantive right or liability determined by the QME replacement order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorPQMEReplacement PQMEFindings and OrderVocational NurseIndustrial InjuryNeck Injury
References
Case No. ADJ7841171
Regular
Sep 30, 2014

KARLA MUNOZ vs. LOPEZ AND COMPANY, STATE FARM

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case concerns a lien claimant's improperly filed "petition for reconsideration." The claimant actually filed an "Objection to Notice of Intent to Dismiss Lien," which was mistakenly processed as a reconsideration petition. The Board dismissed the petition because reconsideration can only be sought from a final order, not pre-trial interlocutory orders. The document did not determine substantive rights and was therefore not a final order eligible for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantGrant Williams M.D.Final OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial OrdersNon-finalInterlocutoryElwood v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ11005277
Regular
Oct 27, 2020

KARLA GONZALEZ vs. A.C. TRANSIT DISTRICT, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

The Appeals Board granted removal and rescinded the WCJ's Minute Order because the order cited a non-existent Labor Code section and lacked the necessary evidentiary support. The Board requires decisions to be based on admitted evidence and clearly reference the supporting record, which was not met here. Consequently, the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, with a recommendation for a new WCJ to clarify the case's direction.

Petition for RemovalRescind OrderReturn to Trial LevelLabor Code SectionInadequate RecordSubstantial EvidenceWCJ Decision BasisAppeals Board ReviewAdmitted EvidenceVoid Ab Initio
References
Case No. ADJ9591888
Regular
Jun 28, 2016

KARLA ROMERO vs. CRYSTAL GARMENT FASHION, INC., PRAETORIAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal. Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which was not demonstrated here. The defendant's argument that the WCJ denied due process by taking the case off calendar for further discovery was rejected, as it did not prevent the statute of limitations defense from being raised later. Furthermore, the defendant's own actions, by filing a declaration of readiness, re-activated the case, precluding dismissal for lack of prosecution. Case ADJ9593559 remains dismissed.

Petition for RemovalDeniedSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJ ReportOff CalendarStatute of LimitationsLack of ProsecutionDue Process
References
Case No. LAO 0878674
Regular
Mar 06, 2008

KARLA BUENO vs. PLAZA DEFENDANT LA RAZA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision that barred a lien claim due to the alleged lack of a fictitious business name permit. The WCAB found that while the lien claimant presented a surgical clinic license, the record was unclear about its actual business name and compliance with fictitious name filing requirements. The case is remanded for further proceedings to determine the lien claimant's true name and establish its compliance with fictitious business name laws.

Fictitious Business Name StatementSurgical Clinic LicenseHealth ServicesBusiness and Professions CodeMedical BoardLien ClaimantOutpatient SettingAdministrative Law JudgeReconsiderationReasonableness of Fees
References
Showing 1-9 of 9 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