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. MON 0218864 MON 0218866
Regular
Sep 11, 2007

TRACY KOOY vs. LAWRY'S RESTAURANT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, on behalf of CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation

This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision that awarded benefits for admitted industrial injuries. The defendant argued the awarded permanent disability percentage was too high, disputing the WCJ's apportionment of causation. The Board denied reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's reliance on the agreed medical evaluators' opinions regarding apportionment, finding the defendant failed to prove otherwise.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedIndustrial InjuriesFibromyalgiaTMJApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidenceLabor Code Section 4663Permanent Disability Indemnity
References
Case No. ADJ7959552 ADJ8162345
Regular
Aug 07, 2014

MARIA CHAVEZ-MARTINEZ vs. RESTAURANT LEADERSHIP GROUP, LLC dba JACK IN THE BOX, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Maria Chavez-Martinez's petition for removal as untimely, as it was filed over 20 days after personal service of the decision. The WCAB also noted the petition was improperly served on all parties. Even if timely and properly served, the petition would have been denied on the merits due to a lack of demonstrable significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCAB concluded reconsideration would be an adequate remedy.

Petition for RemovalUntimely FilingPersonal ServiceWCJ's ReportStrom v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Significant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ7106903
Regular
Sep 15, 2015

DAVID CONNOR vs. RESTAURANTS TO YOU/CAFÉ RUNNER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This order transfers venue for Case No. ADJ7106903, involving David Connor and Restaurants To You/Café Runner, from the San Luis Obispo District Office to the Santa Barbara Satellite Office. The transfer is necessitated by both parties exercising their challenges under Appeals Board Rule 10453, leaving no available judges in San Luis Obispo. The Presiding Judge in Santa Barbara will schedule the matter for trial upon receipt.

Venue transferAppeals Board rule 10453Challenge of judgePresiding Workers' Compensation JudgeSanta Barbara Satellite OfficeSan Luis Obispo District OfficeSetting for trialWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRestaurants to YouCafe Runner
References
Case No. RIV 0079075
Regular
Apr 14, 2008

JOSEPH VIGARI vs. ARNOLD PALMER'S RESTAURANT, EMPLOYER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board overturned a prior finding, ruling that the applicant's nerve compression injury resulting from back surgery was a compensable consequence of the original admitted industrial injury, not a new and independent injury. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to further temporary disability indemnity beyond the 104-week limit established by Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) for the original injury. The Board clarified that the "compensable consequences" doctrine applies, and certain cited cases regarding vocational rehabilitation do not alter this principle for temporary disability claims.

Compensable Consequences DoctrineLabor Code section 4656(c)(1)Temporary Disability IndemnityNew and Independent InjuryBack SurgeryNerve CompressionLateral Femoral Cutaneous NerveVocational RehabilitationStatute of LimitationsPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ8396740
Regular
Jan 13, 2020

AAMIR KAHN vs. Denny's Restaurant

This case involves a dispute over a $11,250.00 bill from QME Dr. Matthew Steiner for a psychological evaluation. Defendant Denny's Restaurant sought reconsideration of an award ordering full payment, arguing the bill was unreasonable. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the case for further proceedings. This action was based on recent case law clarifying the burden of proof for lien claimants and the procedural requirements for defendants responding to medical-legal bills within 60 days.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationQualified Medical EvaluatorQMEMedical-legal evaluationLabor Code section 4622Explanation of Review (EOR)Timely objectionsPenaltiesInterest
References
Case No. ADJ1608897
Regular
Feb 05, 2015

XIOMARA ROMERO vs. WENDY'S RESTAURANT, FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by an applicant against Wendy's Restaurant and Farmers Insurance Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the administrative law judge's report. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it failed to state valid grounds. Therefore, the petition is officially dismissed by order of the Board.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalReport and RecommendationAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWendy's RestaurantFarmers Insurance CompanyFailure to State Grounds
References
Case No. ADJ1938020 LAO 0877660
Regular
Sep 26, 2019

FRANCISCO PEREZ vs. KING TACO RESTAURANT, INC., AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY

Lien claimant New Age Imaging sought reconsideration of a finding that defendant King Taco Restaurant fully satisfied its lien for $\$ 595.00$. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the defendant failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as an endorsed check or testimony of mailing, to prove lien claimant received the payment. The WCJ's original finding is rescinded and the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record on payment and receipt. This ensures a fair hearing and substantial justice for all parties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderBurden of ProofMailing PresumptionEvidence Code 641Due ProcessFair HearingFurther Proceedings
References
Case No. ADJ9943129, ADJ9943127, ADJ10338826
Regular
Dec 22, 2015

LUISA CORTES vs. LUCY'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT, AMGUARD INSURANCE CO, GUARD INSURANCE

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the defendants, Lucy's Mexican Restaurant and its insurers. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was untimely filed. The WCAB clarified that a petition must be received by the Board within the statutory 25-day period, not merely mailed. Since the petition was filed three days after the deadline, the WCAB lacked jurisdiction to consider it.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely filingLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictional time limitWCJJoint Findings of Fact and OrderMailing dateFiling dateDismissal
References
Case No. ADJ3007363 (OXN 0133349), ADJ1569912 (OXN 0133350)
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

JAVIER VILLANUEVA, JAVIER VILLANUEVA-GOMEZ vs. PANDA RESTAURANT GROUP, INC., ESIS INSURANCE SERVICES COMPANY

This case involves Javier Villanueva appealing his workers' compensation award from Panda Restaurant Group. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed the original decision, with one key amendment. The amended finding clarifies that Villanueva suffered 26% permanent disability in case ADJ1569912, entitling him to weekly payments totaling $18,823.75. Additionally, $2,823.50 is to be withheld from accrued indemnity pending resolution of attorney fee division between current and former counsel.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPANDA RESTAURANT GROUPESIS INSURANCE SERVICES COMPANYRECONSIDERATIONAMENDED DECISIONPERMANENT DISABILITYWEEKLY INDEMNITYSIMULTANEOUS COMMENCEMENTACCRUED INDEMNITYATTORNEY FEE DIVISION
References
Case No. ADJ9181559
Regular
Sep 09, 2014

EXTRAIN CERVANTES vs. GARDEN FRESH RESTAURANT CORPORATION, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration and removal filed by the defendant, Garden Fresh Restaurant Corporation and its insurer, Travelers Insurance Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was improperly filed against a non-final interlocutory order. The WCAB also denied removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant's attorney was admonished for filing the petition against a clearly non-final ruling.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalDenial of RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightLiabilityWCJ RulingAdministrative Law JudgeTravelers Insurance Company
References
Showing 1-10 of 158 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