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. ADJ7598160
Regular
Nov 19, 2014

MAURICE JOHNSON vs. PHILADELPHIA EAGLES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, FAIRMONT PREMIER INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a lower decision, finding California lacked jurisdiction over a professional football player's cumulative trauma claim against the Philadelphia Eagles. The Board held that playing only two games in California did not create a sufficient connection to the injury to warrant applying California law, citing *Federal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)*. The applicant's limited physical presence and routine pre/post-game treatment in California were deemed de minimis. Therefore, the applicant took nothing on his California WCAB claim.

CIGAPhiladelphia EaglesReliance Insurance Companycumulative traumaprofessional football playerjurisdictionFederal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)administrative law judgepermanent disabilityapportionment
References
16
Case No. ADJ4698232 (RIV 0076516)
Regular
Jun 21, 2010

GUILLERMO CANAS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA; SCIF STATE EMPLOYEES RIVERSIDE

This case concerns the California Insurance Guarantee Association's (CIGA) right to file an application on behalf of an injured worker, Guillermo Canas, against the State of California. The defendant, SCIF, argued CIGA lacked standing, and its claim was barred by laches and the statute of limitations. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed its prior decision, holding CIGA is a "party in interest" with standing to file. The WCAB found CIGA's application was not barred by the statute of limitations as it was filed within the statutory period. Finally, the WCAB clarified that legal issues, like those concerning uninsured state agencies, not raised at trial are waived and premature to consider.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSCIFCIGAstandinglachesstatute of limitationsreconsiderationparty in interestcumulative traumaLabor Code section 5501
References
13
Case No. ADJ8180232
Regular
Sep 13, 2017

HUBERT OLIVER vs. PHILADELPHIA EAGLES, ACE/ESIS, INDIANAPOLIS COLTS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, HOUSTON OILERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for HOME INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review a judge's finding of no California jurisdiction over a professional football player's injury claim. The Board will consider whether the applicant was hired in California and if playing two games here creates sufficient connection for jurisdiction under the *Johnson* decision. The applicant will be allowed to file a supplemental brief referencing trial transcripts, and all parties will have an opportunity to brief the Board's intention to rule on the sufficiency of California's interest in adjudicating the claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia jurisdictionindustrial injuryprofessional football playeremployment contractssubject matter jurisdictionsupplemental briefingcumulative traumaFederal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)due process
References
6
Case No. ADJ14657802
Regular
Sep 19, 2022

STEVE LAUTER vs. BALTIMORE RAVENS FKA CLEVELAND BROWNS, PERMISSIBLY SELF-INSURED, ADMINISTERED BY BERKLEY ENTERTAINMENT, SAN DIEGO CHARGERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION FOR FREMONT INSURANCE, IN LIQUIDATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior ruling and amended a finding of fact. The Board affirmed that California lacked personal jurisdiction over the Baltimore Ravens (formerly Cleveland Browns) for applicant's claimed injuries. The decision found no evidence of a contract formed in California and that the applicant's activities with the Browns, including games played in California, occurred after his release and were not connected to his claimed injury. The Board also declined to disturb the WCJ's reliance on pre-2005 medical-legal procedures.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPersonal JurisdictionSubject Matter JurisdictionMinimum ContactsSpecial AppearanceContract of HireOffer and AcceptanceOral ContractForum StateLabor Code Section 4062
References
22
Case No. ADJ6857928
Regular
Apr 05, 2015

CALVIN COLLINS vs. ATLANTA FALCONS, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decisions to deny enforcement of a compromise and release agreement and to decline jurisdiction over the applicant's claim. The WCAB found that the applicant's minimal contacts with California, consisting of playing only six games over his seven-year career, were insufficient to establish a legitimate and substantial connection to the alleged cumulative trauma injury. Therefore, asserting California jurisdiction would violate the employer's due process rights. The WCAB referenced the *Johnson* case, holding that such limited exposure does not create a substantial California interest.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCompromise and ReleaseSubject Matter JurisdictionCumulative Trauma InjuryProfessional AthleteDe Minimis ConnectionDue ProcessLegitimate and Substantial ConnectionLabor Code 3600.5Extraterritorial Provisions
References
10
Case No. ADJ8691809
Regular
Apr 14, 2017

NICOLE BORAGNO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CDCR - CENTRAL CALIFORNIA WOMEN'S FACILITY CHOWCHILLA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

This case involves Nicole Boragno's workers' compensation claim against the State of California, CDCR. The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision denying the admission of a supplemental medical report. The WCAB denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report which found the supplemental report inadmissible. This was because discovery had closed at the mandatory settlement conference, and the defendant failed to establish good cause for introducing evidence not previously disclosed. The WCJ noted there was no change in circumstances to warrant the late-filed report, distinguishing it from precedent that allows such reports.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for Reconsiderationmandatory settlement conferencediscovery closureLabor Code section 5502(d)(3)good causesupplemental reportPQMEapportionmenttimeliness
References
2
Case No. ADJ2077721
Regular
Jul 28, 2015

ANA PUEBLA vs. THREE D PLASTICS, CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION AND FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendants in Ana Puebla's workers' compensation claim. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was untimely. California law allows twenty-five days to file a reconsideration petition after a final decision is served by mail, with limited extensions. The Board found this petition was filed well beyond that jurisdictional deadline. Consequently, the WCAB lacked the authority to consider its merits and ordered its dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionWCABWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictional Time LimitDismissedAdministrative Law JudgeWCJ
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dewan v. Blue Man Group Limited Partnership

Plaintiff Brian Dewan, a musician, sued the Blue Man Group entities and individuals, seeking a declaration of co-authorship for musical compositions used in their "Blue Man Group: Tubes" performance and damages for state law claims. Dewan claimed he collaborated with the defendants in composing music for the show and was repeatedly assured of his co-authorship rights and that an agreement would be formalized, but it never materialized. Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing the co-authorship claim under the Copyright Act was time-barred. The court found that Dewan's equitable estoppel argument was unreasonable after late 1993 or 1994, as he had sufficient notice that a lawsuit was necessary. Consequently, the court dismissed the federal co-authorship claim due to the expiration of the statute of limitations and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

Copyright ActCo-authorshipStatute of LimitationsEquitable EstoppelMotion to DismissFederal JurisdictionState Law ClaimsMusical CompositionsCollaborationDeclaratory Judgment
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of 360networks (USA) Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission of California (In Re 360networks (USA) Inc.)

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of 360networks (USA) Inc. (Debtors) initiated an adversary proceeding against the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California (CPUC) seeking to avoid certain fee payments as preferential transfers under the Bankruptcy Code. The CPUC moved to dismiss the action, asserting Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and arguing the court lacked jurisdiction. Judge Allan L. Gropper denied the CPUC's motion, concluding that the court holds in rem jurisdiction over the debtor's property in a preference action. The Court determined that the exercise of this jurisdiction would not offend state sovereignty, citing various forms of potential relief available, including the disallowance of claims by other California state instrumentalities.

Bankruptcy LawSovereign ImmunityEleventh AmendmentIn Rem JurisdictionPreference ActionMotion to DismissPublic Utilities CommissionCalifornia Environmental Quality ActDebtor-Creditor RelationsFederal Jurisdiction
References
45
Case No. SRO 112972
Regular
Jun 12, 2008

STELLA JUAREZ vs. ARTERIAL VASCULAR ENGINEERING, NELSON STAFFING, CENTRE INSURANCE COMPANY by REM, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION by BROADSPIRE for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation

The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) has the right to seek contribution from Centre Insurance Company for workers' compensation benefits paid to an applicant with a cumulative trauma injury. CIGA's claim is not barred by the one-year limitation period for employer contribution claims under Labor Code section 5500.5(e), as CIGA is not an employer and Centre is considered "other insurance" under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9). Therefore, the Appeals Board granted CIGA's petition for reconsideration and reversed the arbitrator's decision, awarding CIGA contribution from Centre.

CIGAContributionReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderLabor Code section 5500.5Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9)Cumulative TraumaGeneral EmployerSpecial EmployerOther Insurance
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 5,500 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