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. ADJ7702084
Regular
Jan 23, 2012

WILLIAM BRAGA vs. CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns whether the City of Sebastopol is entitled to a 15% reduction in permanent disability payments to William Braga, a fire captain who sustained hearing loss. The defendant argues this reduction is permissible under Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(A) because they offered Braga regular work. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, finding the statute inapplicable because Braga lost no time from work and continued his regular duties. The WCAB reasoned that Labor Code section 4658(d) is intended to incentivize employers to return injured workers to employment, a purpose not served when the employee never stopped working.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCity of SebastopolRedwood Empire Municipal Insurance FundFindings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationFire CaptainCumulative PeriodHearing LossPermanent DisabilityScheduled Rate
References
4
Case No. ADJ7826039
Regular
Nov 07, 2014

Jason Horton vs. Oakland Raiders, ACE American Insurance

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the defendant's contentions. The Board rescinded the finding of industrial psychiatric injury, finding it barred by the six-month employment rule under Labor Code section 3208.3(d). The Board affirmed the original decision regarding the 15% increase in permanent disability pursuant to Labor Code section 4658(d). Ultimately, the applicant's permanent disability rating was adjusted to 64%, and attorney fees were modified accordingly.

Industrial injuryProfessional football playerCumulative traumaPsychiatric injurySix-month ruleLabor Code § 3208.3(d)Employment contractActual servicePermanent disabilityLabor Code § 4658(d)
References
0
Case No. ADJ7723776
Regular
Nov 02, 2013

DEBRA CALORA vs. COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the original award. The WCJ had found the applicant sustained a 100% permanent disability and was entitled to a 15% increase in indemnity under Labor Code section 4658(d) for the employer's failure to offer work. However, the Board determined that Labor Code section 4658(d)'s provisions, including the 15% increase, do not apply to awards of 100% permanent disability. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the 15% increase in permanent disability indemnity.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardCookRight upper extremityBilateral carpal tunnelPermanent disabilityLabor Code section 4658(d)Permanent total disabilityLifetime award
References
0
Case No. ADJ6413657
Regular
Feb 26, 2009

LUIS PENA vs. CITY OF SANTA ROSA

The City of Santa Rosa sought reconsideration of a Stipulated Award that adjusted permanent disability payments under Labor Code section 4658(d) starting March 25, 2008. The Board denied the petition, finding the employer's argument that the 15% reduction applied retroactively to all payments was erroneous. The employer failed to comply with statutory requirements for providing notice of permanent disability status and commencing timely payments after temporary disability ended. Consequently, the employer is not entitled to the benefit of the Labor Code section 4658(d) reduction due to its own statutory non-compliance.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardStipulated AwardPermanent Disability IndemnityLabor Code section 4658(d)Police OfficerIndustrial InjuryLow BackPermanent and StationaryOffer of Regular WorkLabor Code section 4061
References
1
Case No. ADJ7852424, ADJ7938790
Regular
Mar 24, 2015

KEITH RAKONCZA vs. COUNTY OF STANISLAUS

This case involves a petition for reconsideration by the defendant regarding a workers' compensation award for Keith Rakoncza. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report which found that the defendant's arguments regarding apportionment and the applicability of Labor Code section 4658(d)(2) were unfounded. The judge found that the defendant's attempt to apportion disability retroactively was unjust and not supported by substantial evidence. Additionally, the judge determined that Labor Code section 4658(d)(2) applied because the defendant failed to make a timely offer of work within 60 days of the applicant's permanent and stationary date.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKeith RakonczaCounty of StanislausYork Risk Services GroupInc.ADJ7852424ADJ7938790Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4658(d)(2)heart injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ8062477
Regular
Apr 08, 2025

ANTONIO MARTINEZ vs. BARODA FARMS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

Antonio Martinez sustained an industrial injury to his cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine while working for Baroda Farms, resulting in a 66% permanent partial disability award. Defendant Zenith Insurance Company petitioned for reconsideration of the initial Findings and Award (F&A) concerning apportionment and the application of Labor Code section 4658(d). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the F&A but amending it to defer the issues of Labor Code section 4658(d) and attorney fees. The case has been returned to the trial level for further proceedings to ensure all parties receive due process.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent Partial DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code Section 4658(d)Substantial Medical EvidencePQMEMedical OpinionReasonable Medical Probability
References
8
Case No. ADJ608971 (SAC 0345754)
Regular
Mar 22, 2010

ROGELIO ROJAS vs. ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES INC, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE

This case involved a dispute over a 15% increase in permanent disability benefits for an employee who sustained a 100% permanent disability. The defendant argued this increase, under Labor Code section 4658(d), did not apply to total permanent disability awards and challenged the retroactive date for annual wage adjustments. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the 15% increase because Labor Code section 4658(d) applies only to permanent disability awards calculated under a specific chart, not to total permanent disability. The Board affirmed the annual wage adjustment date based on precedent and deferred attorney fees pending recalculation.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRogelio RojasAllied Waste Industries IncAmerican Home AssuranceFindings Award and Orderpermanent disabilitypermanent total disabilityLabor Code section 4658(d)(2)state average weekly wageSAWW adjustment
References
3
Case No. ADJ1481761 (SAC 0364589)
Regular
Oct 03, 2011

WANDA BOULT vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a correctional officer, Wanda Boult, seeking workers' compensation benefits for a cumulative trauma injury to her heart and cardiovascular system. The defendant, State of California, Department of Corrections, sought reconsideration of the finding that Ms. Boult is 100% permanently totally disabled. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report. The court found that the defendant's argument regarding Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(A) was inapplicable because the applicant's award was based on lifetime temporary disability indemnity, not the formula in section 4658(d)(1).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityLabor Code section 4658(d)Labor Code section 4659(b)Labor Code section 4662Correctional Counselor II SpecialistCumulative traumaHeart and Cardiovascular systemPrimary pulmonary hypertensionChronic supraventricular arrhythmias
References
2
Case No. ADJ6807374, ADJ6807475
Regular
Apr 25, 2011

CIIRISTINE OSTRANDER vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES/SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

This case involves an employer's failure to provide an injured employee with timely notice of modified or alternative work following a determination of permanent and stationary status. While the employee eventually returned to her regular duties, the employer did not formally offer such positions within the 60-day window mandated by Labor Code section 4658(d)(2). Consequently, the employer is not entitled to a 15% decrease in permanent disability payments. However, the Appeals Board found that awarding the employee a 15% increase would elevate form over substance, given the employee's early return to regular work. Therefore, the Board rescinded the original award of a 15% increase and modified the decision to state there is no 15% adjustment under Labor Code section 4658(d).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardChristine OstranderCounty of Los Angeles/Sheriff's Departmentindustrial injuryrespiratory systemasthmainternal diseasepermanent disabilitypermanent and stationary (P&S) dateLabor Code section 4658(d)
References
2
Case No. ADJ4566523 (RIV 0077883)
Regular
Dec 20, 2010

James Fleming vs. ALCOA FASTENING SYSTEMS, AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to defer the award of permanent disability, allowing the WCJ to apply Labor Code section 4658(d) after the defendant failed to offer work. While affirming the 15% permanent disability rating, the Board deferred the calculation of indemnity pending further proceedings on the section 4658(d) adjustment. The applicant had argued the WCJ erred by excluding earnings evidence and failing to apply the section 4658(d)(2) increase. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning for excluding the new evidence but agreed with the applicant regarding the work offer requirement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentDiminished Future Earning CapacityOgilvieReconsiderationLabor Code section 4658(d)Regular Modified Alternative WorkFindings and AwardWCJ Report
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 10,054 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