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. ADJ8835660
Regular
Jan 19, 2018

What Happened in Felix vs. Weber Metals Reconsideration?

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration by the defendant regarding a permanent total disability award for Joe Casillas. The defendant argued against the total disability finding, questioned injury to the left upper extremity, and contested the basis for vocational rehabilitation findings. The Board granted reconsideration to amend the findings, rescinding the finding of injury to the left upper extremity due to the applicant unilaterally withdrawing that issue. However, the Board affirmed the permanent total disability finding based on substantial medical and vocational evidence, including the applicant's significant limitations in daily living and unsuitability for vocational rehabilitation, despite the absence of left upper extremity injury.

Permanent total disabilityvocational rehabilitationindustrial injurybilateral upper extremitiescervical spinepsychefabricatorState Compensation Insurance Fundpetition for reconsiderationadministrative law judge
References
3
Case No. ADJ3481462 (OAK 0297878)
Regular
Sep 24, 2009

How Did the WCAB Rule in Hardgrove vs. Intercon Security?

The defendant sought reconsideration of an award finding industrial injury to the applicant's left upper extremity and shoulder, causing temporary disability and need for further medical care. The applicant's treating physician, Dr. Nolan, provided opinions regarding her left shoulder and other body parts, while Dr. Cabayan also provided opinions on the left shoulder and other extremities. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the award, clarifying that future medical care is consistent with Dr. Cabayan's opinions for the left shoulder and Dr. Nolan's opinions for other body parts. The Board affirmed the award with this specific amendment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryInstructional AssistantLeft Upper ExtremityCompensable ConsequenceTemporary DisabilityFurther Medical CareSubstantial Evidence
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

What Did the WCAB Decide in Cuadra vs. Community Home Care?

In 2009, the claimant sustained a left knee injury at work, leading to an established workers’ compensation claim that was later amended to include other left lower extremity conditions. In 2013, the claimant sought to further amend the claim to include consequential reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD) to the left upper extremity. Both a Workers’ Compensation Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Board denied this request, citing a lack of credible medical evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board’s decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence. The court noted conflicting medical opinions, with independent medical examiners finding no objective signs of RSD, while the claimant’s treating physician made the diagnosis based on subjective complaints. The court also rejected the claimant’s argument that advance payments of compensation estopped the carrier from contesting liability, clarifying that such payments do not preclude other defenses.

Reflex Sympathetic DystrophyRSDLeft Upper ExtremityConsequential InjuryWorkers' Compensation BenefitsMedical EvidenceIndependent Medical ExaminationObjective SignsSubjective ComplaintsEstoppel
References
6
Case No. ADJ2804761 (LAO0886335)
Regular
Jun 13, 2014

How Were Death Benefits Handled in Bocanegra vs. Sun-Gro Commodities?

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the defendant's contentions regarding the applicant's Petition to Reopen. The Board found no good cause to reopen the claim for new and further disability related to the applicant's left upper extremity, left lower extremity, insomnia, urological, or internal conditions. This decision was based on the applicant's failure to present substantial evidence of new and further disability beyond what was previously adjudicated or known at the time of the initial award. However, the Board noted that the employer's liability for medical treatment for these conditions may still exist, irrespective of disability findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilityGood CauseLabor Code Section 5410Agreed Medical ExaminerFindings and AwardInsomniaUrological IssuesInternal Systems
References
3
Case No. ADJ7311200
Regular
Aug 03, 2017

Can a WCJ Be Disqualified for Appearance of Bias?

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration by defendant Wausau regarding an arbitrator's findings that applicant sustained industrial injury to his pulmonary system and upper extremities during a cumulative period. Wausau argued the claim was time-barred and that liability for upper extremity injury was improper. The Board denied Wausau's petition, finding Wausau failed to meet its burden of proof on the statute of limitations defense. The Board also determined that applicant properly amended his claim for upper extremities and that apportionment of liability based on days worked was appropriate.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCoast Crane CompanyEmployers Insurance of WausauThunder Machine WorksAIX Insurance CompanyAerotekAllegis Group Insurance Companycumulative injurypulmonary systemupper extremities
References
10
Case No. ADJ602790 (STK 0179563)
Regular
Jul 17, 2012

What Were the Key Rulings in Torrez vs. SuperShuttle?

This case involves Tracee Mawyer's workers' compensation claim against Gallo Glass Company for cumulative trauma injuries. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the trial judge's denial of injury to applicant's bilateral upper extremities, specifically carpal tunnel syndrome. The Board found Dr. Clayman's reports sufficiently supported an industrial injury to the upper extremities and awarded additional temporary disability for the period following carpal tunnel surgery. The case was returned for a new permanent disability rating for the upper extremity injuries.

Cumulative traumabilateral upper extremitiescarpal tunnel release surgerytemporary disabilitypermanent disability ratingreconsiderationDr. Claymanneck injuryshoulder injuryspine injury
References
0
Case No. 01-15-00374-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2015

Why Was Removal Denied in Rush vs. California Correctional Institution?

This case involves an appeal filed by the National Wildlife Federation (Appellee) against the Upper Trinity Regional Water District and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Appellants). The appeal concerns the District Court's judgment of March 6, 2015, which reversed and remanded TCEQ's decision to grant Water Use Permit No. 5821 to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. The core issue is TCEQ's alleged failure to properly implement Texas Water Code Section 11.085 (l)(2), which requires stringent water conservation and efficiency for interbasin water transfers. The Appellee argues that TCEQ improperly relied on a voluntary guide (Report 362) instead of fulfilling legislative directives for robust conservation standards, and that the District's water conservation plan lacks adequate implementation and enforcement mechanisms, thus failing to meet the 'highest practicable levels of water conservation and efficiency achievable' as mandated by law.

Water ConservationInterbasin TransferEnvironmental LawAdministrative LawAppellate ReviewTexas Water CodeWater Use PermitDrought Contingency PlanRegulatory ComplianceBest Management Practices
References
25
Case No. ADJ10065069
Regular
May 16, 2018

What Did the WCAB Clarify in Ontiveros vs. Savers Stores?

This case concerns defendant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) finding of injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to the applicant's right upper extremity. Defendant argued that no evidence supported injury to other alleged body parts and that the WCJ should have made findings on those parts instead of deferring the issue. The WCAB denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision to limit the trial to the threshold issue of right upper extremity injury AOE/COE. The WCAB found Dr. Amster's opinion constituted substantial evidence for the right upper extremity injury and that the WCJ acted within their authority by deferring other issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAOE/COEQualified Medical ExaminerReconsiderationCumulative TraumaRepetitive Strain InjuryPreexisting ConditionAggravationContributing CauseMandatory Settlement Conference
References
7
Case No. ADJ11489310
Regular
Oct 26, 2020

Why Was Reconsideration Denied in Gomez vs. Dorothy Stevens?

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and found that the applicant sustained industrial injury to his left pinkie. The Board rejected the applicant's claim for other body parts, finding no substantial evidence of injury beyond the pinkie. The matter is returned to the trial level to further develop the record regarding injury to other parts of the left upper extremity. The intoxication defense and Labor Code Section 5402 presumption were also addressed.

Labor Code Section 3600(a)(4)intoxication defenseWCJADJ11489310reconsiderationfindings of factleft pinkieleft handneuropsyche
References
5
Case No. ADJ4393668 (LBO 0387479)
Regular
Feb 10, 2011

Why Was Reconsideration Dismissed in Sabino vs. Johnson Pump Company?

This case involves Elodia Lopez's appeal of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision regarding her left upper extremity injury. The WCAB granted reconsideration to amend a finding regarding the need for further medical treatment to the applicant's left shoulder, finding her treating physician's opinion better reasoned than the panel QME's. The Board otherwise affirmed the decision but issued a notice of intention to assess sanctions against applicant's counsel for failing to properly cite evidence, violating procedural rules.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSecond Amended Findings and AwardApplicantDefendantIndustrial InjuryLeft Upper ExtremityTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical Treatment
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 1,898 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