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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. POM 240908, LAO 712097
Significant

Juan A. Rivera, Applicant vs. Tower Staffing Solutions, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, in an en banc decision, holds that the 10 percent penalty for late indemnity payments under Labor Code section 4650(d) applies only to periodic payments and not to lump-sum proceeds from commutations or Compromise and Release agreements.

En BancReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5814Labor Code Section 4650(d)Commuted AwardCompromise and ReleaseDeath BenefitsVocational Rehabilitation Maintenance AllowancePeriodic Indemnity PaymentsLump Sum Proceeds
References
Case No. POM 240908, LAO 712097
En Banc

Juan A. Rivera, Calvin Crump vs. Tower Staffing Solutions, State Compensation Insurance Fund, Los Angeles Unified School District, Helmsman Management Service

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board holds that the 10 percent penalty for late payment under Labor Code section 4650(d) applies only to periodic indemnity payments and not to the lump sum proceeds of commutations or Compromise and Release (C&R) agreements.

En Banc DecisionLabor Code § 4650(d)CommutationCompromise and Release (C&R)Periodic Indemnity PaymentsLump SumDeath BenefitsVocational Rehabilitation Maintenance Allowance (VRMA)PenaltiesLabor Code § 5814
References
Case No. ADJ10871045 ADJ10871047 ADJ10871049
Regular
Feb 19, 2019

XAVIER HERNDON vs. BENIHANA, INC.; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's order commuting all future payments to a lump sum. The Board found the commutation order violated defendant's due process rights by failing to provide notice and an opportunity to object or present evidence. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including notice and a potential hearing on the commutation request.

Order of CommutationPetition for ReconsiderationDue ProcessNoticeOpportunity to be HeardWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLump SumStipulationsAward
References
Case No. ADJ1 0172085
Regular
Apr 28, 2016

MOHAMMAD SARHADDI vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding an order that commuted all future permanent disability payments to a lump sum. The defendant argued this order was issued without proper service, denying them due process. The WCAB agreed with the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) recommendation to grant reconsideration. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the original commutation order and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of Commutation of Future PaymentsDue ProcessPetition for CommutationReport and RecommendationRescindedTrial LevelFurther ProceedingsWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ558286
Regular
Dec 13, 2010

DEBORAH McCALLUM (Deceased) WINONA McCALLUM vs. AGRO-TECH LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a deceased worker's dependent seeking commutation of future annuity payments to a lump sum due to alleged financial hardship. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition for reconsideration. The WCAB found that even though the judge's ruling on jurisdiction over the annuity company was flawed, the applicant's request was procedurally defective. Specifically, the applicant's interests are intertwined with his sister's, and their payments are managed by a guardian ad litem, preventing the applicant from acting independently.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJurisdictionAnnuity Companycommutationlump sumStatute of LimitationsLabor Code section 5804Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR)dependency claim
References
Case No. ADJ9332840
Regular
Aug 01, 2017

ANA BARAJAS vs. VF CORPORATION, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a Findings and Order, but only to strike the ordered $10\%$ penalty and interest. The Board affirmed the original order awarding applicant $\$ 5,598.65$ pursuant to a prior Compromise and Release agreement. Defendant's contention that penalties and interest were improperly applied to the commuted lump sum settlement had merit and was adopted by the Board. The Board found defendant's petition for reconsideration was timely filed concerning the May 26, 2017 Findings and Order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompromise and Releasepermanent disability advancesmutual mistakepenaltiesfuture indemnity paymentslump sumtimeliness
References
Case No. ADJ9066614
Regular
Sep 08, 2015

James Stewart vs. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, overturning the WCJ's denial of a lump-sum commutation of his permanent disability award. The Board found sufficient evidence of applicant's extensive debts, including significant amounts owed to family and friends for living expenses, supporting a partial commutation. However, the commutation will exclude the car loan, as applicant's current income is deemed sufficient to manage that debt. The matter is returned to the trial level to determine the precise commutation amount.

CommutationPermanent Disability AwardFinancial HardshipPetition for ReconsiderationStipulated AwardCumulative TraumaHypertensionCorrectional OfficerDebt ObligationsLump Sum
References
Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ2497883 (SFO 0450940) ADJ3261393 (SFO 0504693)
Regular
Apr 30, 2010

JANETTE HARDIN vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, CHARTIS INSURANCE, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This case involves Chartis Insurance seeking reconsideration of an arbitrator's decision setting the date of cumulative trauma injury for Janette Hardin's breast cancer as May 28, 1997, not the previously stipulated date of May 16, 2001. Chartis argued the stipulated date was res judicata and could not be altered, especially in a contribution proceeding. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, affirming that contribution proceedings allow for a relitigation of liability and the determination of the true date of injury based on facts, not prior stipulations between the applicant and one defendant. The Board reasoned that findings of liability in the primary case are not binding in supplemental contribution proceedings.

Cumulative traumaDate of injuryContribution proceedingsRes judicataStipulated awardLabor Code section 5500.5Apportionment of liabilityCase-in-chiefSupplemental proceedingsGreenwald v. Carey Distribution Company
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,471 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