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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ2021542 (LAO 0874590)
Regular
Feb 03, 2010

RAUL MURILLO vs. PARAGON SCHMID BUILDING PRODUCTS; TRAVELERS

This case involves an applicant's cumulative trauma claim where the defendant insurer, Travelers, sought to join Liberty Insurance Corporation and Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania as parties. The administrative law judge initially denied joinder due to an EAMS registration issue with the proposed carriers. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the denial, and joined Liberty as a party defendant, finding its coverage period necessary for adjudication. However, Pennsylvania was not joined due to insufficient evidence regarding its necessity and potential coverage overlap.

RemovalOrder Denying JoinderPetition for Order Joining Party DefendantCumulative TraumaEAMSWCIRBNecessary PartyAdjudicationAdministrative ConvenienceLiberty Insurance Corporation
References
Case No. ADJ2479479 (GRO 0028015)
Regular
Jul 22, 2011

JULIO MORENO vs. CSD ENGINEERING, SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO THE CONNECTICUT INDEMNITY COMPANY ADMINISTERED BY LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY ADMINISTERED BY AMERICAN CLAIMS SAN DIEGO

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration due to an incomplete and improperly organized record. Specifically, the supplemental Findings and Award failed to clearly identify all parties, stipulated issues, and the specific roles of various insurance carriers and administrators. The Board rescinded the award and returned the matter to the trial level to ensure all parties' legal names and relationships are clearly established. This action is necessary to ensure a decision is supported by substantial evidence and due process is followed.

Petition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Findings and AwardRescindedReturned to WCJClarify RecordIdentity of PartiesInsurance CompaniesThird Party AdministratorsAdjusting AgentsContribution
References
Case No. ADJ1973537 (SRO 0141664)
Regular
Jun 24, 2019

KENT WARD vs. TIMEC COMPANY, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of an arbitration decision that found his employer, Timec, 25% comparatively negligent for his injury, reducing Timec's credit from a third-party settlement. The applicant argued for a higher employer negligence percentage to increase his potential workers' compensation benefits. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the Arbitrator's findings and reasoning. The Board found the applicant failed to present evidence to overcome the Arbitrator's negligence determination.

Third-party creditComparative negligenceArbitrator's findingsPetition for reconsiderationLabor Code section 3861Employer's liabilityThird-party claim valueNet settlement amountCredit against workers' compensationEmployer's breach of duty
References
Case No. ADJ9334766, ADJ319279 (MON 0358792), ADJ3055294 (MON 0361854)
Regular
Jul 17, 2015

TROY WHITETO vs. LONG BEACH TRANSIT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Troy Whiteto's Petition for Reconsideration against Long Beach Transit. The dismissal was based on improper service, as the applicant failed to serve all adverse parties as required by Labor Code section 5905 and WCAB Rule 10510(b). Specifically, the applicant only served one of the defendant's attorneys and did not serve other relevant parties. Consequently, the WCAB found the petition procedurally deficient and ordered its dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalServiceAdverse PartiesAttorney of RecordWCJ ReportLabor Code section 5905WCAB Rule 10510(b)Represented PartyLong Beach Transit
References
Case No. ADJ8944782
Regular
Sep 24, 2015

MARLYN HERNANDEZ vs. PINK HOUSE IMPORTS, LLC, PROCENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

Citywide Scanning Service, Inc. sought reconsideration of discovery orders denying its objections, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed its petition. The Board found that the orders were interlocutory and thus not subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, Citywide, not being a party to the underlying case and not demonstrating lien claimant status, lacked standing to object or file the petition. The Board clarified that the proper procedure for contesting interlocutory discovery orders is a petition for removal, but only parties aggrieved may file it.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition to QuashSubpoena Duces TecumStandingFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderDiscovery MattersLien ClaimantWCAB Rule 10843Petition for Removal
References
Case No. ADJ603568 (MON 0359075)
Regular
Feb 22, 2013

COLEE PITCHFORD vs. TRIMAC TRANSPORTATION, CHARTIS

In Pitchford v. Trimac Transportation, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was primarily based on the petition's failure to comply with Labor Code section 5905, which mandates service on all adverse parties. The WCAB also noted that even if properly served, the petition would have been denied on its merits, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. Finally, the Board clarified that MJR Management Services, Inc. is not a party but an alleged representative, and their representation of a lien claimant lacked proper documentation in the EAMS.

Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5905Adverse partiesService deficiencyWorkers' compensation administrative law judgeReport and RecommendationElectronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMSLien claimantMJR Management Services
References
Case No. ADJ2746818
Regular
Dec 16, 2019

GUSTAVO VELA vs. CAFE MIDI. INC, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION ISURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Technology Insurance Company (Petitioner), a non-party, challenging an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) concerning applicant Gustavo Vela. Petitioner sought to set aside the OACR, alleging denial of due process due to an unrelated, subsequent claim involving Petitioner. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition, primarily because it was filed untimely, exceeding the 25-day jurisdictional deadline after Petitioner received the OACR. Furthermore, even if timely, the Petition would have been dismissed for lack of standing as Petitioner was not a party to the original settlement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and Releaseaggrieved personLabor Code section 5900due processcumulative trauma claimadministrative law judgeuntimely petition
References
Case No. ADJ10084051
Regular
Oct 14, 2019

LIDIO LEONEL TORRES vs. KML SERVICES INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

CareMeridian, LLC, a healthcare provider, sought to set aside an approved Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) compromise and release (C&R) agreement that resolved the applicant's future medical care. CareMeridian argued it was an aggrieved party and was denied due process regarding payment for its services. The WCAB denied the petition, finding CareMeridian was not a party to the C&R and therefore not entitled to notice or a hearing at the time of its approval. Furthermore, the Board determined that CareMeridian lacked standing to challenge the C&R's adequacy, as the applicant and insurer had the statutory right to compromise their liabilities.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationAggrieved PartyStandingDue ProcessMedical Provider LienSkeleton PetitionNon-PartyNoticeOpportunity to Be Heard
References
Case No. ADJ8410804
Regular
Jan 10, 2017

RAMIRO GONZALEZ vs. Mc CALL'S NURSERIES, INC., HORTICA INSURANCE & EMPLOYEES BENEFITS

This case involves an applicant seeking workers' compensation after an industrial injury, who also filed a third-party civil suit. Initially, the parties stipulated there was no employer negligence, but the applicant later sought to withdraw this stipulation after discovering new evidence relevant to employer fault. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding that the Administrative Law Judge acted within their authority to allow the issues of employer negligence and third-party credit to be added for trial, as these are intertwined and the defendant failed to show substantial prejudice from this procedural step. Removal is an extraordinary remedy, and the Board concluded that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if the defendant ultimately prevails on these issues.

Petition for RemovalThird Party CreditEmployer NegligenceLabor Code Section 5313Labor Code Section 5702Good CauseStipulationPre-trial Conference StatementMandatory Settlement ConferenceThird Party Civil Suit
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,429 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