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. ADJ2516908
Regular
Feb 23, 2010

LETICIA TAPIA-SERRATO vs. MISSION FOODS, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE, INC., CHARTIS CLAIMS, INC.

This case involves Mission Foods (defendant) petitioning for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The defendant claimed a mutual mistake regarding the EDD lien in a Compromise and Release agreement. However, the Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report that found no mutual mistake. The defendant admitted awareness of the EDD lien and signed an agreement making them responsible for all liens.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDMISSION FOODSAMERICAN HOME ASSURANCECHARTIS CLAIMSINC.LETICIA TAPIA-SERRATOORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATIONEDD LIENCOMPROMISE AND RELEASEMUTUAL MISTAKE
References
Case No. ADJ6713391
Regular
Aug 15, 2013

PEDRO TELLO MENDEZ vs. MISSION FOODS GRUMA CORPORATION, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the initial May 30, 2013 decision. The Board amended the decision to reflect that the defendant, Mission Foods Gruma Corporation, is estopped from opposing the applicant's petition for costs. Consequently, the applicant's Petition for Costs is now granted. The rest of the original decision remains affirmed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationEstoppelPetition for CostsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJMission Foods Gruma CorporationTravelers Property Casualty CompanyPedro Tello MendezAmended Decision
References
Case No. ADJ15751788
Regular
Jul 18, 2025

OLGA BENITEZ vs. MISSION FOODS, ARCH INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued an order on July 18, 2025, to rectify a clerical error in a prior decision dated May 29, 2025, concerning case number ADJ15751788. The error involved the omission of the case number from the caption of the earlier Opinion and Order Granting Petition For Reconsideration and Decision After Reconsideration. The Board clarified that this correction was made without the need for granting reconsideration, citing that such errors can be corrected at any time. Additionally, an earlier Petition for Removal, related to the same parties, was dismissed on May 29, 2025, subsequent to its withdrawal by the petitioner.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClerical ErrorOpinion and OrderCase NumberPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAdjudication NumberGallagher Bassett ServicesArch Indemnity InsuranceMission Foods
References
Case No. SAL 104703
Regular
Mar 14, 2008

GONZALEZ vs. GILROY FOODS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This case concerns a supplemental award of attorney's fees under Labor Code § 5801 following the denial of a defendant's petition for writ of review. The Court of Appeal found no reasonable basis for the petition and remanded the case for the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) to award fees for services rendered in connection with that petition. The WCAB affirmed the award of attorney's fees, clarifying that the WCJ lacks jurisdiction to approve fees under § 5801, which is the sole province of the WCAB upon remand.

Labor Code § 5801Petition for Writ of ReviewSupplemental AwardAttorney's FeesRemandWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCourt of AppealStipulation and AwardWCJFindings Order and Award
References
Case No. ADJ9154979; ADJ9318850; ADJ9318848; ADJ9532548
Regular
Aug 06, 2018

MARIA DEL CARMEN LOPEZ ANAYA vs. RAMONA’S FOOD GROUP, (PSI), CALIFORNIA CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY CO OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Ramona's Food Group's petition for removal of an order compelling it to serve all documents to a lien claimant. The Board found that Ramona's Food Group failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which are required for removal. The WCJ's report, incorporated by the Board, also noted the petition's procedural deficiencies, including lack of service on all parties. Consequently, the order compelling the service of documents remains in effect.

Petition for RemovalOrder Compelling Service of RecordWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeLien ClaimantCompromise and ReleaseAOE/COESubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmZA Management
References
Case No. POM 0290497
Regular
Feb 22, 2008

WALID THOMAS vs. KAZI FOODS, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Walid Thomas's petition for reconsideration of a decision that found his alleged back and hernia injuries sustained while employed by Kazi Foods were not industrial. The Board adopted the findings of the administrative law judge, who found Dr. Hajj's opinion to be substantial medical evidence supporting this conclusion. The judge also found Thomas's testimony not credible due to his extensive prior medical history of similar back injuries and a hernia.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration deniedIndustrial injuryDr. Hajj's opinionSubstantial medical evidenceCredibility findingPlace v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Kazi FoodsInc.
References
Case No. GRADE
Regular
Dec 09, 2009

KIM VUKCEVICH vs. SAFEWAY, INC., WHOLE FOODS MARKETS, ACE INSURANCE

The Appeals Board reverses the WCJ’s decision that Whole Foods must reimburse Safeway for benefits paid to the applicant. The Board finds that Safeway failed to prove a second cumulative trauma injury by substantial medical evidence.

Cumulative traumaIndustrial injuryLeft shoulderSafewayWhole FoodsACE InsuranceReimbursementMedical evidenceBurden of proofQualified Medical Examiner
References
Case No. ADJ3434154
Regular
Mar 28, 2011

GARY ZIMMERMAN vs. LEPRINO FOODS, INC., MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that Leprino Foods violated Labor Code section 132a by failing to place the applicant on a required union leave of absence. While the Board affirmed the WCJ's decision that the applicant's termination was lawful based on a doctor's work restrictions, they awarded a 50% increase in compensation up to $10,000, plus costs, due to the Section 132a violation. However, the Board denied back pay, agreeing with the WCJ that lost wages were not caused by the employer's contract violation but by the lawful termination and the applicant's insufficient mitigation efforts. A dissenting commissioner argued for back pay, citing the discriminatory nature of the termination during the mandated leave and the lack of evidence for the WCJ's findings on misleading doctors and failed mitigation.

Labor Code section 132aLeprino FoodsMatrix Absence Management CompanyGary ZimmermanBrian Belanger D.C.permanent and stationary reportunion grievanceArbitratorback payreinstatement
References
Case No. ADJ10682518
Regular
Nov 30, 2017

LORENZO ENRIQUEZ vs. HOUSE FOODS AMERICA, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT

This case involves a Petition for Removal and Reconsideration filed by the defendant, House Foods America and Tokio Marine Management. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal, finding that the WCJ's finding of injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment was a final order, making reconsideration the proper remedy. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's findings and giving significant weight to their credibility determinations regarding the applicant's testimony.

RemovalReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10843Final OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueAOE/COECredibility Determination
References
Case No. ADJ8332892, ADJ8584295
Regular
Oct 10, 2014

DEANNA SATTERWHITE vs. WHOLE FOODS MARKET, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by Whole Foods Market, as it was withdrawn by the petitioner. This dismissal is based solely on the petitioner's withdrawal of their appeal. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) retains the authority to proceed with a recommendation for sanctions at the trial level. Consequently, the WCAB officially orders the dismissal of the petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedSanction RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardTrial LevelWCJWithdrawn PetitionGallagher Bassett ServicesWhole Foods MarketDeanna Satterwhite
References
Showing 1-10 of 361 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