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. ADJ4648769 (RIV0066289)
Regular
Mar 11, 2009

MARLON AGUIRRE vs. JACK IN THE BOX, CNA INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award finding 41% permanent disability for a left knee injury. The Board rescinded the award because the judge's permanent disability rating was not supported by the evidence, specifically the Agreed Medical Examiner's finding of only 17% whole person impairment. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including formal DEU rating instructions. Additionally, the Board noted the defendant's argument for a 15% reduction in benefits appears inapplicable to the 2004 injury date.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ4648769Marlon AguirreJack in the BoxCNA Insurance CompanyReconsiderationFindings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Industrial InjuryLeft Knee
References
Case No. ADJ15203597; ADJ15203084; ADJ15203598
Regular
Aug 04, 2025

FRANCISCO AGUIRRE vs. CALIFORNIA DRYWALL CO.; THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered a Petition for Removal. The Board denied the petition, stating that removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely granted. The petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor did they show that reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy. Therefore, the Board concluded that the petition should be denied.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyWCJ ReportAppeals BoardCalifornia Drywall Co.The Hartford
References
Case No. ADJ7083461
Regular
May 25, 2012

FRANCISCO AGUIRRE vs. DIOLAKIA ASSOCIATES, STOCKWELL HARRIS

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses Francisco Aguirre's petition for reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final interlocutory order that did not determine substantive rights. Additionally, the petition was dismissed for failing to be verified. The petition for removal was denied as the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal are dismissed and denied, respectively.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightWCABRemovalVerified PetitionWCJ's ReportIrreparable HarmInadequate Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ10298858
Regular
Oct 14, 2020

FRANCISCO AGUIRRE vs. NORTH COUNTIES DRYWAL, INC., INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

Applicant Francisco Aguirre filed a petition to reopen after a $49,500 Compromise and Release (OACR) was approved for an industrial injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) treated the petition as one for reconsideration but dismissed it as premature. The WCAB returned the matter to the trial level for the judge to consider the petition as a motion to set aside the OACR, applying a 60-day extension to statutory deadlines due to Executive Order N-68-20.

Petition to ReopenCompromise and ReleaseIndustrial InjuryDrywall HangerPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalPrematureSet AsideLabor Code Section 5909Labor Code Section 5315
References
Case No. ADJ14154023
Regular
Sep 26, 2022

COREY CASTILLO vs. CENTINELA STATE PRISON, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding a hernia injury sustained by a correctional officer to be compensable. While the specific statutory presumption for certain public safety officers did not apply, the Board affirmed the judge's finding that the applicant met their burden of proof. This was based on the substantial medical evidence from Dr. Woolf, who opined the hernia was caused by the applicant's heavy lifting and aggravated by a specific work incident. The claim was also found to be timely filed within the statute of limitations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCorey CastilloCentinela State PrisonCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ Reportsubstantial medical evidencePlace v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.industrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ11629176
Regular
Dec 30, 2019

Isabel Aguirre vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

This case involves an applicant correctional officer who claimed industrial injury to her back, neck, and shoulder. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the applicant is not entitled to the Labor Code section 3213.2 presumption. This presumption, for lower back impairments, explicitly applies only to specific law enforcement classifications, not correctional officers. The Board amended the prior decision to remove the presumption and ordered further medical record development.

Labor Code §3213.2PresumptionPeace OfficerCorrectional OfficerDuty BeltReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJMedical RecordPeace Officer Classification
References
Case No. ADJ1203673 (SBR 0341671)
Regular
Dec 30, 2008

HECTOR AGUIRRE vs. TARGET STORES

This case involves an applicant denied workers' compensation benefits for a back injury. The denial was based on two grounds: the claim was filed post-termination and thus barred under Labor Code § 3600(a)(10), and the applicant failed to prove the injury was industrially caused. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the applicant's testimony regarding prior notice to the employer was contradictory and insufficient, and that the medical evidence did not adequately establish industrial causation given incomplete or inaccurate medical histories.

Labor Code § 3600(a)(10)post-termination claimindustrial injuryburden of proofnotice of injurytermination of employmentcredible testimonymedical historycumulative injuryprior injury
References
Case No. ADJ8246745
Regular
Dec 19, 2017

Tommy Martinez vs. Security Paving Company, The Hartford Insurance Company

This case concerns Tommy Martinez's workers' compensation claim against Security Paving Company. The Board granted reconsideration to amend the award, finding Martinez did not sustain a compensable psychiatric injury due to insufficient employment duration. However, the Board affirmed the finding of permanent total disability from his orthopedic injury, ruling it unapportionable and supported by substantial medical evidence independent of vocational reports. The dissenting opinion argues the vocational evidence and QME's opinion on total disability are not substantial, lacking clarity on work capacity due to industrial injury versus other factors.

WCABSecurity Paving CompanyThe Hartford Insurance CompanyTommy MartinezADJ8246745Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardpermanent total disabilitycumulative trauma injuryshoulders
References
Case No. ADJ7419350
Regular
Apr 27, 2015

MARLON WHITLEY vs. BELL PLASTICS, THE HARTFORD

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's attorney fee split, rescinding the original order. The WCJ failed to adequately consider all statutory factors for a reasonable attorney fee, specifically the responsibility assumed, care exercised, and results obtained, relying too heavily on estimated hours. The case is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings, development of the record, and a new decision. This new decision must properly consider all relevant factors mandated by Labor Code section 4906 and WCAB Rule 10775.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAttorney's Fee SplitLabor Code section 4906WCAB Rule 10775Findings and OrderSanctionHourly Attorney's FeesGood Faith NegotiationTime Expended
References
Case No. ADJ7921523
Regular
Apr 13, 2017

CARMEN AGUIRRE vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

In this case, lien claimants Landmark Medical Management and PharmaFinance sought removal of a WCJ's order staying all proceedings on their lien claims pending further court order. The WCJ based the stay on criminal indictments against individuals allegedly associated with the lien claimants, under Labor Code section 4615, which automatically stays liens filed by or on behalf of an indicted provider. However, the Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the stay, and returned the matter for further proceedings. This was because the record lacked sufficient evidence to establish the indicted individual's specific connection to the liens or whether the liens were filed "on behalf of" the indicted person, as required by section 4615.

Removal PetitionLien ClaimantsCriminal IndictmentLabor Code 4615Automatic StayWorkers Compensation FraudPetition for StayWCJ OrderSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Showing 1-10 of 24 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