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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 24, 2013

Conn v. Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP (In re Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP)

This case involves Vittoria Conn, a former employee of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, who initiated a putative class action adversary proceeding. She alleged violations of the federal, New York, and California WARN Acts due to mass layoffs without proper advance notice. Dewey & LeBoeuf, the Debtor, filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that these claims should be processed through the claims allowance system and that the 'liquidating fiduciary principle' exempted them from WARN Act obligations. The Court denied the Debtor's motion to dismiss, concluding that WARN Act claims, which seek equitable relief, are appropriately brought in an adversary proceeding. The Court postponed decisions on class certification and the administrative or priority status of the claims, noting these issues are to be resolved in the main bankruptcy case.

WARN ActNY WARN ActCAL WARN ActClass ActionAdversary ProceedingBankruptcyMotion to DismissEquitable ReliefLiquidating Fiduciary PrincipleEmployee Layoffs
References
51
Case No. 92
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 24, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Frank Aungst

Claimant Frank Aungst, a store manager for Family Dollar, contracted COVID-19 in April 2020 and subsequently suffered a stroke. He filed a workers' compensation claim, alleging work-related exposure due to his frequent public contact in an essential retail role with inadequate protective measures. The Workers' Compensation Board established the claim, applying a "prevalence" framework for COVID-19 exposure, which assesses significantly elevated hazards in the workplace. The employer argued this framework was inconsistent with the Workers’ Compensation Law. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Board's decision, finding the "prevalence" framework compatible with current interpretations of the law, and that the Board's findings of work-related COVID-19 and consequential stroke were supported by substantial evidence.

COVID-19Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryCausal RelationshipWorkplace ExposurePrevalence FrameworkStrokeEssential WorkerRetailNew York Court of Appeals
References
15
Case No. ADJ3867236 (LAO 0817551)
Regular
Jan 20, 2012

RODNEY LIDDELL vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION, Permissibly Self-Insured c/o INTERCARE INSURANCE

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision finding applicant entitled to vocational rehabilitation services and VRMA. The defendant argued that jurisdiction had expired and no procedural framework existed for completing a vocational rehabilitation plan. However, the Board found the defendant failed to comply with interruption notice requirements, thereby preserving the applicant's right to services. The Board suggested parties agree to a QRR or return to the WCJ for dispute resolution, confirming an adequate framework remains.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings Order and AwardVocational RehabilitationVRMALabor Code Section 5410Rehabilitation UnitQualified Rehabilitation RepresentativeAdministrative Director Rule 9813Interruption Notice
References
0
Case No. ADJ800932 (OAK 0299866) ADJ2725270 (OAK 0299867) ADJ635812 (OAK 0299868) ADJ4541817 (OAK 0308810)
Regular
Feb 16, 2010

JOAN STEPP vs. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, rescinded the previous award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found the prior decision to be insufficient regarding apportionment of disability among multiple injuries as required by *Benson*. Additionally, the Board questioned the vocational expert's analysis for a finding of total permanent disability, as it did not adequately address retraining feasibility per *LeBoeuf*. The matter is remanded for the Agreed Medical Evaluator to provide clarified apportionment opinions and for a new decision consistent with *Benson* and *LeBoeuf*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuriesCumulative TraumaPermanent Total DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorBensonLeBoeufVocational Expert
References
3
Case No. ADJ10116932
Significant
Jul 15, 2019

KRIS WILSON, Applicant vs. STATE OF CA CAL FIRE; legally uninsured, adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding its authority to establish an analytical framework with five non-exhaustive factors for determining what constitutes a 'catastrophic injury' under Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(2)(B).

Catastrophic injuryLabor Code section 4660.1(c)(2)(B)Psychiatric injuryImpairment ratingMechanism of injuryTemporal restrictionsLegislative intentSB 863En Banc decisionPrecedent decision
References
15
Case No. SRO 0123390
Regular
Mar 28, 2008

BOB CROUSE vs. ALADDIN'S ELECTRIC COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review a WCJ's 100% permanent disability award based on a LeBoeuf application, which the defendant argued was unsupported by medical evidence. The Board rescinded the award and remanded the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This action was taken to first address applicant's newly filed Petition to Reopen, alleging new and further disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLeBoeuf situationVocational Rehabilitation CounselorPetition to ReopenNew and Further Disability
References
1
Case No. ADJ6598413
Regular
May 11, 2010

SUSAN TOSTE vs. KERMAN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award. The Board found the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) impairment rating was based on an outdated legal standard rejected in *Almaraz/Guzman II*. Since the AME's report predated the controlling precedent and the evaluator wasn't given a chance to supplement their opinion under the correct legal framework, the case is returned to the trial level for further medical record development.

ADJ6598413Kerman Unified School DistrictTristar Risk ManagementSusan TosteWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderPermanent Disability
References
6
Case No. ANA 0369239 ANA 0369240 ANA 0369241
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

STEVEN A. BANKS vs. COCO'S RESTAURANT, CNA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the administrative law judge's finding of 100% total disability was based on a legally deficient medical record and an improper application of the *LeBoeuf* doctrine. The Board found the Agreed Medical Examiner's report failed to properly address apportionment and accurate medical history, necessitating further medical development. Consequently, the prior decision was rescinded and the case returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardIndustrial InjuryLow BackPsycheTotal DisabilityVocational RehabilitationCommutationAttorney's Fees
References
2
Case No. ADJ9981379 ADJ10049541
Regular
Oct 08, 2020

ULISES AVILA vs. LARRY GONZALES dba LARRY GONZALES FARM LABOR, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board reversed a WCJ's finding that a lien claimant's services ended on March 16, 2015, determining instead that services extended to June 8, 2015. This decision makes the lien timely filed under Labor Code section 4903.5(a). The Board affirmed the WCJ's orders except to find the lien timely filed and to defer the lien's allowance. The matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the Board's decision and to assess the lien under the framework of *Colamonico*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantStatute of LimitationsSubpoena Duces TecumMedical-Legal ServicesReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersLabor Code Section 4903.5(a)Timely FiledDeferred Issue
References
4
Case No. MON 0256677, MON 0256794
Regular
Aug 08, 2008

DANNY LeCORNU vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN'S SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of Los Angeles' petition for reconsideration, affirming a 100% permanent disability award for Danny LeCornu. The Board held that the judge properly considered the applicant's inability to compete in the open labor market, a factor consistent with *LeBoeuf v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.*, in determining the permanent disability rating. This consideration, separate from apportionment of pre-existing conditions, was found to be within the judge's discretion under Labor Code section 4662.

WCABDanny LeCornuCounty of Los AngelesDepartment of Children's ServicesSupplemental Findings and Awardpermanent disabilityvocational rehabilitationLeBoeuf v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.SB 899Labor Code section 4660
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 70 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