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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ3218661 (OAK 0339889)
Regular
Feb 07, 2011

CHANCE ROLLINS vs. JOHN MARTIN STABLES, INC.; AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE administered by AIG, CLAIMS SERVICES

The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration, finding the WCJ's ruling was not a final order. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and denied the applicant's request for a neurology consultation under Labor Code §4601(a). The matter was returned to the trial level with instructions to issue an order for a new QME panel in neurology, as Dr. Jamasbi's request for a consultative neurological evaluation constituted good cause for a new panel under 8 Cal. Code Regs. §31.7. Attorney fees for the ex parte communication were upheld.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code 4601(a)Labor Code 4062.3QMEAgreed Medical EvaluatorNeurological ConsultMedical DirectorSpecialty Panel
References
Case No. ADJ9379623
Regular
May 18, 2018

ETHERY AMARI vs. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, rescinding a prior order that denied her request for an additional neurology Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The applicant sustained admitted injuries including to her spine and shoulder, and also claimed headaches. Her treating physician recommended a neurology consult twice, and the applicant testified about worsening headaches post-injury. The Board found that these factors constituted good cause and demonstrated significant prejudice, warranting the appointment of a neurology QME panel.

Petition for RemovalPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorNeurology QMEWCABFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryCervical SpineLumbar SpineHeadachesPrimary Treating Physician
References
Case No. ADJ6671882
Regular
Jul 31, 2009

ANGELICA ALMANZA vs. VOLER TEAM APPAREL, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

In this case, the defendant sought reconsideration of an award requiring neurological and psychiatric consultations for the applicant. The defendant argued that a psychiatric consultation was barred by Labor Code section 3208.3(d) as the applicant had less than six months of employment. However, the Appeals Board found the record inadequate to determine if a psychiatric injury was actually claimed. Therefore, the Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the award, and returned the matter for further proceedings to establish a proper record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngelica AlmanzaVoler Team ApparelBerkshire Hathaway Homestate CompaniesADJ6671882ReconsiderationFindings and AwardNeurological consultationsPsychiatric consultationsIndustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ1498865 (WCK 0071162) ADJ3989369 (WCK 0071163) ADJ2618113 (WCK 0071164)
Regular
Jul 09, 2010

MICHELLE LIVENGOOD vs. MT. DIABLO STATE PARK (CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION) and AIG

This case concerns Michelle Livengood's multiple industrial injuries. The Court of Appeal found contradictory findings regarding her permanent and stationary status, remanding the case for clarification. The Appeals Board has now granted reconsideration, affirmed the original findings but deferred the issue of temporary disability. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify if the neurological consultation was diagnostic, which would necessitate a finding of not permanent and stationary.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturPermanent and StationaryTemporary DisabilityNeurological ConsultationDiscogramQualified Medical EvaluatorPetition for ReconsiderationWrit of ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
Case No. SAC 355392
Regular
Jan 29, 2008

JANELL J. HASTINGS vs. GEORGE VISMAN dba HIGH HILL RANCH, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, which sought to compel a psychiatric or psychological consultation. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's reasoning that a panel for psychological issues is provided by the Division of Workers' Compensation if parties do not agree on a Qualified Medical Evaluator. Therefore, the applicant's request for removal to obtain this specific consultation was denied.

Petition for RemovalPsychiatric consultationPsychological consultationQualified Medical EvaluatorAdministrative Director Rule 32(c)Agreed Medical EvaluatorDivision of Workers' CompensationMedical UnitPanelWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ4225526 (GOL 0092072)
Regular
Apr 20, 2017

JESUS ARROYO vs. JOHN CRAVENS PLASTERING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves Jesus Arroyo's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge. Medical evidence from Dr. Markovitz established that Arroyo suffered a total and permanent disability resulting from industrial injuries, including an aortic aneurysm repair and subsequent strokes. The Board found Dr. Markovitz's opinions constituted substantial medical evidence, despite conflicting defense opinions, and affirmed that all necessary medical care and permanent disability were industrially caused.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJesus ArroyoJohn Cravens PlasteringState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerGerald Markovitzechocardiogramaortic root dilationexpanding aortic aneurysm
References
Case No. ADJ3605789 (GOL 0101314), ADJ2387995 (GOL 0101316), ADJ460036 (GOL 0101315)
Regular
Jul 26, 2012

JORGE VIVANCO vs. NEVERLAND VALLEY RANCH, ESTATE OF MICHAEL JACKSON, MJJ PRODUCTIONS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY, UNITED STAFFING ASSOCIATES, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, MONARCH CONSULTING dba PES PAYROLL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the original findings regarding employment for both United Staffing Associates and Monarch Consulting. The Board found that United Staffing Associates was never the applicant's employer, rescinding findings that they were the employer on October 8, 2007, and for a cumulative trauma period. Regarding Monarch Consulting, the Board found they were not the employer on October 2, 2006, but were the general employer from March 2006 through August 30, 2007, with specific exclusions, reversing the prior ruling on the specific injury date. The case was returned for further proceedings consistent with these revised findings.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardJorge VivancoNeverland Valley RanchEstate of Michael JacksonMJJ ProductionsTravelers IndemnityUnited Staffing AssociatesAmerican Home Assurance CompanyMonarch ConsultingPES Payroll
References
Case No. ADJ1682557
Regular
Jun 30, 2018

PAUL MORAD vs. 2365 OAK RIDGE WAY; ONE BEACON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from the WCJ's decision to take the case off calendar. The WCJ correctly removed the case from the trial calendar due to incomplete discovery, specifically the lack of a permanent and stationary report for orthopedic injuries and pending dental/eye consultations. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning, finding that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if adverse to the petitioner later. Therefore, removal, an extraordinary remedy, was not granted.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ Reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmadequate remedyreconsiderationLabor Code §5502(d)(3)Mandatory Settlement Conferencediscovery
References
Case No. ADJ655912 (SDO 0342137) ADJ677760 (SDO 0342143)
Regular
Feb 11, 2009

MARIA E. GARCIA vs. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, AIG DOMESTIC CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both the applicant's and defendant's petitions for reconsideration. The Board upheld the trial judge's decision to deny massage therapy, finding it not medically necessary per ACOEM guidelines and not supported by the treating physician's reports. Conversely, the Board affirmed the need for a sleep study and orthopedic/psychiatric consults based on the primary treating physician's consistent recommendations, rejecting the defendant's challenges to the exclusion of PQME reports and admission of other evidence. Ultimately, the Board found substantial medical evidence supported the original award and denied both parties' requests for review.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderNeckFurther Medical TreatmentSleep StudyOrthopedic ConsultPsychiatric ConsultMassage TherapyPanel Qualified Medical Examiner
References
Showing 1-10 of 264 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