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. ADJ11167540
Regular
Feb 15, 2019

CHARLES SENIFF vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Federal Express's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding of jurisdiction. Federal Express argued the Board lacked jurisdiction because the applicant did not work in California after 2006. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found California jurisdiction supported by Labor Code section 3600.5(a) and precedent case law, deeming these sufficient grounds despite the defendant's jurisdictional challenge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFederal Express CorporationSedgwick Claims Management ServicesADJ11167540Santa Ana District OfficeAmended Findings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgejurisdictionLabor Code section 3600.5(a)Alaska Packers Asso. v. Industrial Acci. Com.
References
Case No. ADJ4449218
Regular
Mar 04, 2010

LUIS ALVARADO vs. STAFFING SERVICES, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Here is a summary of the case in a maximum of four sentences for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision, which found jurisdiction over a dispute between an injured worker's applicant and defendant Staffing Services, Inc. The ALJ correctly determined that there was no express agreement between Staffing Services and the lien claimant, Beverly Hills Pharmacy, fixing payment amounts, thus Labor Code section 5304 did not divest the Board of jurisdiction. The Board also found that removal was not appropriate for this final determination. Procedural arguments regarding a denied continuance due to the defense attorney's illness were also rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRemovalLien ClaimantExpress AgreementLabor Code Section 5304JurisdictionStaffing Services Inc.State Compensation Insurance FundBeverly Hills Pharmacy
References
Case No. ADJ287866 LAO 0813289 ADJ7596806
Regular
Apr 30, 2012

CHESTER JACKSON vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS

This case involves a workers' compensation claim by Chester Jackson against Federal Express. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB affirmed the original decision but amended it to include penalties and interest owed to Dr. Friedman, pursuant to Labor Code section 4622(b), for specific dates of service. The exact amounts are to be adjusted by the parties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAmended DecisionPenaltiesInterestLC4622(b)Dates of ServiceFederal ExpressChester JacksonFriedman Psychiatric Med
References
Case No. ADJ741218 (OAK 0217902)
Regular
Sep 14, 2018

ROBIN JOHNSON vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS, BROADSPIRE, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration and Removal filed by the applicant, Robin Johnson, in a workers' compensation matter against Federal Express and its adjusters. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because reconsideration is only appropriate for final orders that determine substantive rights, not interlocutory or procedural decisions. The WCAB also denied the Petition for Removal, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm justifying such action. Therefore, the WCAB dismissed the petition and denied removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive Right or LiabilityInterlocutory OrdersProcedural DecisionsEvidentiary DecisionsPetition for RemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ12138014 ADJ10965293
Regular
Jan 21, 2020

DONALD WRIGHT vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The WCAB denied Defendant Federal Express Corporation's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding that applicant Donald Wright is entitled to a separate Agreed Medical Evaluator or Qualified Medical Examiner for his cumulative trauma (CT) claim. Defendant argued applicant waived this right by not filing a claim form for the CT claim, citing *Navarro v. City of Montebello*. However, the Board found that while the initial finding of injury AOE/COE was a threshold issue, the entitlement to a separate QME for the CT claim was interlocutory. As Defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, removal was denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDONALD WRIGHTFEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATIONADJ12138014ADJ10965293Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJcumulative trauma (CT) claimpanel qualified medical evaluator (QME)
References
Case No. ADJ11101523
Regular
Aug 13, 2018

SUBHPREET GILL vs. JARNAIL SINGH, KING STAR EXPRESS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendant King Star Express's petition for removal, rescinding a prior order that denied the joinder of Total Quality Logistics LLC and Wish Farms LLC. The Board determined that if these entities are indeed joint employers, they are necessary parties for a full adjudication of the case. The matter was returned to the trial level for the Workers' Compensation Judge to address the joinder of these parties. This decision hinges on the degree of control Total Quality Logistics and Wish Farms exercised over the applicant's work, which is crucial for establishing an employment relationship.

Petition for RemovalJoinder of PartiesJoint EmployersIndependent ContractorSpecial EmployerGeneral EmployerDirection and ControlWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeLabor Code Section 5307.5
References
Case No. ADJ9843286
Regular
Oct 10, 2017

MARQUIS MAYFIELD vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, PSI, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

In *Mayfield v. Federal Express Corporation*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior order. The WCAB rescinded an August 2, 2017 order that had commuted future weekly payments to a lump sum of $6,000. This rescission was based on the defendant's petition for reconsideration, supported by the applicant's counsel, who also requested rescission. The primary reason for rescission was that the full settlement award had already been advanced to the applicant, leaving no remaining funds for commutation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCommutation OrderRescindedFederal Express CorporationSedgwick CMSPermanent Disability AwardEconomic HardshipStatement of Non-OppositionAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ8871378
Regular
May 04, 2015

JAIME NAVARRO vs. EXPRESS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Jaime Navarro's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that he was an independent contractor, not an employee, of Express Transportation Systems when injured. Navarro argued the judge misapplied the multi-factor test for employment status from *Borello*. The Board adopted the judge's report, emphasizing their power to resolve conflicts and make credibility determinations. One commissioner dissented, arguing the employer failed to meet its burden of proof to establish independent contractor status, citing a lack of contractual evidence and significant employer control.

WCABExpress Transportation SystemsState Compensation Insurance FundJaime NavarroIndependent ContractorEmployee StatusBorello factorsRight to ControlAffirmative DefenseLabor Code section 3357
References
Case No. ADJ3746440
Regular
Mar 24, 2011

JASON NGUYEN vs. NETWORK APPLIANCE, INC., SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION, MATRIX

The defendant sought reconsideration of an award allowing Dr. Tahami's and Express Interpreters' medical liens. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse Dr. Tahami's reimbursement award, finding the treatment was for a non-industrial psychiatric condition. The Board deferred the award for Express Interpreters pending further proceedings, directing the WCJ to consider recent en banc precedent on the employer's obligation to provide interpreter services as part of medical treatment. Therefore, Dr. Tahami's lien was disallowed, and Express Interpreters' lien was deferred.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNetwork ApplianceInc.Safety National Casualty CorporationJason NguyenDr. TahamiExpress InterpretersLien ClaimantsReconsiderationFindings Award Order
References
Case No. ADJ8147593
Regular
Dec 16, 2019

BETZAIDA MENDEZ vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a fee dispute. The Board found that an express contract, including an arbitration clause, existed between the lien claimant and the defendant for medical services. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 5304, the Board lacks jurisdiction to resolve fee disputes arising from such express agreements. Therefore, the petition was denied, affirming the WCJ's finding of an arbitrable contract.

Lien claimantPPO Contractfee disputearbitration provisionexpress agreementWCAB jurisdictionSection 5304medical treatment disputescontract interpretationexclusive jurisdiction
References
Showing 1-10 of 190 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