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. ADJ9250544
Regular
Jul 31, 2015

SAMANTHA RIVERA vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior finding that the County of Alameda violated Labor Code section 132a. The County had precluded an employee, Samantha Rivera, from using accrued sick leave to supplement temporary disability benefits or attend medical appointments related to her industrial knee injury. The Board found that the County's Memorandum of Understanding permitted employees to integrate sick leave with State Disability Insurance benefits, making their action discriminatory. The prior award of up to $10,000.00 was thus upheld.

Labor Code section 132ajuvenile institutional officeraccrued sick leavetemporary disability benefitsmedical appointmentsindustrial injuryPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardMemorandum of UnderstandingState Disability Insurance
References
Case No. ADJ8833300, ADJ8833298
Regular
Oct 20, 2019

RICHARD FEIGEL PEREZ vs. CITY OF OAKLAND, JT-2 INTEGRATED RESOURCES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a prior decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The applicant alleged the defendant City of Oakland violated Labor Code section 132a by discriminating against him when returning to work after an industrial injury. The Board found the record unclear as to whether the defendant deviated from its own return-to-work procedures as outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding, specifically regarding the review of treating physician reports and the scheduling of fitness-for-duty tests. Further development of the record is needed to determine if a prima facie case of discrimination was established and if the defendant had legitimate business reasons for its actions.

Labor Code 132aRetaliationDiscriminationFitness for Duty TestReturn to WorkMemorandum of Understanding (MOU)Treating PhysicianAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)WCAB
References
Case No. SDO 0335244
Regular

FREDDY GOMEZ vs. EL TORITO RESTAURANT, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

This case involved a petition to disqualify a Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) based on a prior declaration of bias and an alleged appearance of bias. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition. The WCAB found that while a previous case established a past appearance of bias, the current petition lacked specific evidence of present bias or appearance thereof. Furthermore, the WCAB concluded that sufficient time had passed since the prior proceedings, and the appearance of bias, if any, had sufficiently attenuated.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationAdministrative Law JudgeLabor Code section 5311WCAB Rule 10452Appearance of BiasActual BiasBlanket RecusalMandatory Settlement ConferenceIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ6634260
Regular
Aug 02, 2010

MELCHOR ELIZARRARAS vs. MIKE BUBALO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior finding that the parties were not subject to an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process. The Board found the original decision was based on unclear issues and the record may support a valid ADR process applicable to the applicant's injury. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision on whether the applicant's injury is covered by a valid ADR system under Labor Code §3201.5.

Labor Code §3201.5Alternative Dispute ResolutionADR systemcollective bargaining agreementSouthern California District Council of LaborersMike Bubalo Construction CompanySeabright Insurance Companyindustrial injurylow back injuryright shoulder injury
References
Case No. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Case No. ADJ183801 (LAO 0823088)
Regular
Sep 30, 2016

JOSEFINA PLAZA vs. AARON INDUSTRIES, INC., PMA INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a finding that Aaron Industries unreasonably delayed paying a lien claimant. The original decision imposed a penalty, but the defendant argued it was denied due process as its objection was not considered. The WCAB agreed, finding the defendant's due process rights were violated because the administrative law judge issued the decision without reviewing the defendant's timely filed objection. The matter was therefore returned to the trial level for proper consideration of the defendant's arguments.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code Section 5814Unreasonable DelayOrder to Pay Lien ClaimantDue Process ViolationObjection to Amended PetitionLaw Offices of Graiwer KaplanW-9 formStipulations
References
Case No. ADJ2785272 (MON 0214399)
Regular
Jul 20, 2012

OLE BARRING vs. MCMAHAN'S FURNITURE COMPAN, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION by SEDGWICH CLAIMS for FREMONT INDEMNITY, TIG/FAIRMONT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted TIG/Fairmont's petition for reconsideration. The Board rescinded the arbitrator's Finding of Facts due to procedural deficiencies, specifically the failure to adequately document the admitted evidence and provide a proper report on reconsideration. The case is returned to the arbitrator to issue a statutorily compliant decision, clearly identifying all admitted evidence and stipulations. The arbitrator is instructed to consider only previously submitted exhibits and evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationArbitration Finding of FactsCumulative Trauma InjuryInsurance CoverageLiquidationAdministrative Law JudgeMemorandum of HearingStipulationsAdmitted Exhibits
References
Case No. ADJ12014398
Regular
Mar 28, 2025

ROBERT JOLLEY vs. UNITED MECHANICAL, INC.; ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Robert Jolley's petition for reconsideration. Jolley, an applicant, sustained an industrial neck injury in 2019 while employed by United Mechanical, Inc. He filed a third-party negligence lawsuit against The Whiting Turner Contracting Company, which settled. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) found that United Mechanical, Inc. was not negligent and thus entitled to full credit against Jolley's workers' compensation liability from the civil settlement. Jolley challenged this, arguing employer negligence due to constructive notice of hazards and inadequate safety measures. The Appeals Board, adopting the WCJ's report, affirmed that Jolley failed to establish employer negligence, concluding that the employer did not know, nor should have reasonably known, of the dangerous condition prior to the injury.

Third-party creditEmployer negligenceConstructive noticePetition for reconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersLabor CodePermanent partial disabilityTemporary total disabilityCivil lawsuit settlementIncident report
References
Case No. ADJ4086603 (LAO 0829698) ADJ4469358 (LAO 0829699)
Regular
May 01, 2009

ADA ROZENBLAT vs. CEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEM

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board notice addresses a dispute over attorney's fees and costs awarded as sanctions. The defense seeks $800.50 for opposing a petition for reconsideration, while applicant's counsel, Daniel Escamilla, concedes only $540.00. The Board finds $800.50 reasonable and proposes to award this amount to defense counsel, Pearlman, Borska & Wax, L.L.P. This award is separate from any other sanctions payable to the General Fund.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADA ROZENBLATCEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEMADJ4086603ADJ4469358ATTORNEY'S FEESCOSTSSANCTIONSLABOR CODE § 5813PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Showing 1-9 of 9 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