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. ADJ17808664
Regular
Oct 22, 2025

Edith Gomez vs. Garfield Beach CVS, LLC; Indemnity Insurance Company of North America

The defendant petitioned for removal from a WCJ's Findings of Fact and Order (F&O) issued on June 11, 2025, which found medical opinions unsubstantial and ordered a discovery plan. The defendant argued that the discovery plan violated Labor Code section 5502(e)(3) and that existing medical reporting was substantial evidence. The Appeals Board granted the petition for removal, rescinded the original F&O, and substituted a new F&O, returning the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The new F&O stated that opinions from Renee Kohanim, D.C., and Dabney Blankenship, Ph.D., were not substantial medical evidence, but Dr. David Edelman's studies were.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial Medical EvidenceLabor Code Section 5502(e)(3)Discovery PlanQualified Medical EvaluatorAgreed Medical ExaminerFindings of Fact and OrderRescindSubstitute
References
2
Case No. ADJ2709955 (MON 0356320)
Regular
Jun 21, 2017

Mario Cocola vs. California Hospital Medical Center

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Mario Cocola's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that he sustained $69\%$ permanent disability from industrial injuries. Cocola argued the administrative judge erred by disregarding the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion that he was totally disabled from the open labor market due to orthopedic injuries. The Board agreed with the judge's report that the physician's opinion lacked sufficient objective basis for the change in work restrictions. A dissenting opinion argued the medical and vocational evidence supported a $100\%$ permanent disability finding and requested clarification from the medical examiner.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Awardpermanent disabilitycumulative traumalumbar spinecervical spinepsychecervicogenic headachesEmergency Unit CoordinatorAgreed Medical Examiner
References
1
Case No. ADJ11255525
Regular
Dec 02, 2019

GWENDOLYN JOHNIGAN vs. UC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER

This case involves an applicant denied workers' compensation benefits for industrial injury to her right leg and knee, with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denying her petition for reconsideration. The WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's finding that the applicant did not sustain industrial injury, relying on a panel qualified medical evaluator's opinion that the work duties were insufficient to cause an injury. The applicant argued the medical evidence was not substantial and sought further development of the record. However, the WCAB found the applicant failed to meet her burden of proof with substantial medical evidence. A dissenting opinion argued the medical evidence was insubstantial and required further development.

Petition for ReconsiderationPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorOrthopedistSubstantial Medical EvidenceFurther DevelopmentSupplemental ReportingDeposition TestimonyIndustrial InjuryRight LegRight Knee
References
4
Case No. ADJ9709726
Regular
Jun 25, 2015

LAURA NUNEZ vs. SUTTER PACIFIC MEDICAL FOUNDATION, SUTTER HEALTH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant challenged the finding of industrial injury AOE/COE for thoracic outlet syndrome, arguing it wasn't an issue for trial and the medical evidence was insufficient. The Board found that thoracic spine injury was an issue and that Dr. Avery's opinion provided substantial medical evidence to support the thoracic outlet syndrome finding. Any potential defects in the original WCJ opinion were cured by the WCJ's subsequent report.

Thoracic outlet syndromeAOE/COEPetition for Reconsiderationsubstantial medical evidenceG. James Avery M.D.Steven Bratman M.D.industrial injuryapportionmentWCJlabor code 5313
References
1
Case No. ADJ869205 (SAC 0294976) ADJ302322 (SAC 0354178)
Regular
Oct 11, 2010

Patricia Rush vs. The Permanente Medical Group; Athens Administrators Concord

This case involves Patricia Rush claiming cumulative trauma injuries to her knees and back, among other body parts, against The Permanente Medical Group. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the Administrative Law Judge's findings of industrial causation for knee injuries lacked substantial medical evidence, with conflicting and uncertain Qualified Medical Evaluator opinions. The Board rescinded the prior findings and ordered further development of the medical record, suggesting an Agreed Medical Examiner or a court-appointed physician to resolve the causation issue for the knee injuries. The matter is returned to the trial level for a new final determination after the record is further developed on all issues, including injury causation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanente Medical GroupAthens Administratorscumulative trauma injurykneesbackshouldershandswristsindustrial causation
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Eaton v. Chahal

This consolidated decision by Justice William H. Keniry addresses common discovery issues across six negligence actions in Rensselaer County Supreme Court. The primary focus is the requirement for a "good faith" effort to resolve discovery disputes, as mandated by section 202.7 of the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts (22 NYCRR). The court emphasizes that a "good faith" effort necessitates significant contact and negotiation between counsel. Due to a complete failure to comply with this rule, the motions and cross-motions in five cases (Eaton, Frament, Lindeman, Madsen, and Malave) are denied. In the Oathout case, the defendants' motion is conditionally granted, pending plaintiff's compliance with discovery demands. The court also outlines its position on substantive discovery issues like medical reports, collateral source information, statutory violations, age/date of birth, photographs, and authorizations for workers' compensation and no-fault insurance files.

Discovery disputesBill of particularsGood faith requirementCPLR Article 31Medical reportsCollateral source informationStatutory violationsWorkers' compensation filesNo-fault insurance filesJudicial discretion
References
19
Case No. ADJ4198635
Regular
Aug 20, 2009

ANGELIQUE LARSON vs. WALGREENS, Permissibly Self-Insured, adjusted by SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Walgreens' petition for reconsideration regarding Angelique Larson's industrial injury. Walgreens argued the administrative law judge exceeded her authority by not allowing a further deposition of Dr. Tacheff and that his opinion lacked substantial evidence. The Board found Dr. Tacheff's opinion on the applicant's TMJ and dental injury, caused by a fall as a retail clerk, to be substantial medical evidence. The Board affirmed that adequate discovery occurred and that medical treatment is not apportionable, thus the need for future TMJ treatment was established.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryTMJ-dentalWalgreensSedgwick CMSPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAwardOrder
References
13
Case No. ADJ79 96674
Regular
Mar 24, 2016

ARLZENIA HASLEY vs. EL CENTRO REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, which sought to invalidate the medical evidence of the Agreed Medical Examiner (AME), Dr. Luros. The WCAB found that removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which the defendant failed to demonstrate. The defendant's arguments regarding flawed medical opinions and the AME's unavailability can be addressed through standard appeal procedures. Furthermore, the defendant filed a supplemental pleading without prior permission, which was disregarded by the Board.

Petition for RemovalArlzenia HasleyEl Centro Regional Medical CenterTriStar Risk ManagementWCABWCJsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationsupplemental pleading
References
2
Case No. ADJ1649220
Regular
Aug 19, 2009

ERIC LUND vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY (STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND) LAKEPORT FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (FASIS), CLEARLAKE OAKS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (FASIS)

This case involves a firefighter claiming industrial injury to his jaw and tonsil cancer, with the initial finding supporting the presumption of injury. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing that the WCJ improperly relied on medical opinions obtained after discovery closure and in violation of physician selection procedures. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the initial findings, and returned the matter for further proceedings due to procedural errors in admitting key medical evidence. The Board emphasized that evidence obtained after discovery closure and potentially exceeding applicant's rights under Labor Code section 4062.1(e) should not have been admitted.

Labor Code section 3212.1squamous cell carcinomatonsil cancerlymph node cancerfirefighter injurycumulative injurypresumption of injuryrebutted presumptionLabor Code section 4062.1panel QME
References
3
Case No. ADJ9567706
Regular
Oct 09, 2015

Sally Nunes vs. CITY OF SANTA MARIA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further develop the medical record regarding the applicant's psyche injury, as the WCJ's finding relied too heavily on the applicant's perceptions rather than actual employment events. The Board upheld the exclusion of the defendant's witness due to their failure to timely provide discovery, deeming it an appropriate sanction for a discovery violation. The case is returned to the trial level for the physician to clarify causation and for the WCJ to issue a new decision on all submitted issues. This action is necessary because the initial medical opinion lacked sufficient analysis of actual work events and the applicant's undisclosed personal history impacted the original findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCumulative Trauma InjuryPsycheAustin O'DellWitness StatementDiscovery ObligationDue ProcessRolda v. Pitney BowesLabor Code section 3208.3
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 21,887 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