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. ADJ3674520
Regular
Mar 29, 2012

Linda Elachkar vs. Northrop Grumman Corporation, Chartis Insurance Services

This case involves supplemental attorney's fees awarded under Labor Code § 5801. The Court of Appeal denied the employer's petition for writ of review in *Northrup Grumman Corporation v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.*, finding no reasonable basis for the appeal. Consequently, the matter was remanded for the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board to award supplemental attorney's fees to the applicant, Linda Elachkar. The parties stipulated to a fee of $4,812.50, which the Board found to be reasonable.

Supplemental Attorney's FeesLabor Code § 5801Petition for Writ of ReviewReasonable BasisRemandAppeals BoardStipulationAttorney's FeeNorthrop Grumman CorporationChartis Insurance Services
References
Case No. ADJ3674520 (ANA 0411593)
Regular
May 26, 2011

LINDA ELCHKAR vs. NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Northrop Grumman's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior award that found applicant sustained an industrial back and neck injury. Defendant argued the claim was barred by the statute of limitations, but the Board found no evidence the applicant knew her disability was work-related prior to filing her application. Consequently, the Board affirmed the WCJ's decision regarding the date of injury and the employer's liability for the cumulative trauma.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNorthrop Grumman CorporationChartis Insurance Servicescumulative injurystatute of limitationsdate of injuryLabor Code 5412disabilitycompensable temporary disabilitypermanent disability
References
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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ6585876, ADJ4285015 (POM 0167573)
Regular
Oct 12, 2015

Vicente Jackson vs. Northrop Grumman Corporation, Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania

This case concerns Vicente Jackson's cumulative trauma back injury claim against Northrop Grumman and its insurer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded prior findings, and remanded the case for further development of the record. The primary issues are whether the applicant's claim was timely filed within the statute of limitations and whether his work activities constituted a new cumulative trauma injury. The WCAB found that Dr. Sanders' reports provided substantial medical evidence for a cumulative trauma injury, but the statute of limitations issue requires further factual development regarding the applicant's knowledge of the injury and the timing of medical treatment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVICENTE JACKSONNORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATIONINSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIACalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAWCJcumulative trauma injurystatute of limitationsLabor Code section 5412
References
Case No. ADJ9689895
Regular
Sep 19, 2025

ROBERT GONZALES vs. NORTHROP GRUMMAN SERVICES CORPORATION, AIG

The Appeals Board denied Northrop Grumman's petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant argued the judge erred by not requiring a pre-trial conference statement at the mandatory settlement conference and by setting the matter for trial without notice of issues. However, the Board noted that defendant's own actions invited or waived the alleged error, and a subsequent filing of the statement rendered the argument moot. Removal is an extraordinary remedy, and reconsideration is an adequate remedy for any potential adverse decision.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJMandatory Settlement ConferencePre-Trial Conference StatementTriable IssuesLabor Code Section 5811WCAB Rule 10515DemurrersPetitions for Judgment on Pleadings
References
Case No. ADJ8903041
Regular
Jul 01, 2014

MAGALI MANRIQUE DE ARCHA vs. MCDONALD'S/SANCHEZ FAMILY CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This order dismisses Magali Manrique de Archa's Petition for Removal in her workers' compensation case against McDonald's/Sanchez Family Corporation. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board adopted and incorporated the administrative law judge's report, which recommended dismissal. The Board found no grounds to grant removal, thus dismissing the petition.

Petition for RemovalDismissalReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportSan Bernardino District OfficeSanchez Family CorporationCalifornia Restaurant Mutual Benefit CorporationAmerican Claims ManagementAlvandi Law Group
References
Case No. ADJ5487199 ADJ5087748 ADJ8108959 ADJ8253201
Regular
Oct 09, 2017

AVIGAIL URUETA vs. NORTHROP CORPORATION, AIG, FREMONT INDEMNITY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a November 28, 2016 Joint Findings and Award. Subsequently, the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) issued an Amended Joint Findings and Award on January 4, 2017, within the permissible 15-day window for amendments. Since no further petitions for reconsideration were filed regarding the amended decision, the WCAB vacated its initial grant of reconsideration. Consequently, the petitions for reconsideration of the original award are dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNorthrop CorporationAIGFremont IndemnitySedgwick CMSPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardAmended Joint Findings and AwardWCJWCAB Rule 10859
References
Case No. ADJ8493192, ADJ8386046
Regular
Feb 05, 2016

HECTOR CAMPOS vs. CELL-CRETE CORPORATION, OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC., INFRASOURCE, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves applicant Hector Campos seeking reconsideration of a Findings and Award concerning cumulative injuries sustained while employed by Cell-Crete Corporation and Infrasource. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) found applicant sustained a curable injury at Cell-Crete but no injury at Infrasource. Applicant argued improper consolidation and need for further discovery, while Cell-Crete asserted a post-termination defense and challenged the WCJ's reliance on an Agreed Medical Evaluator's opinion. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the petitions and answers, ultimately adopting the WCJ's report and denying reconsideration, affirming the original Findings and Award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCell-Crete CorporationOld Republic General Insurance CorporationGallagher Bassett ServicesInc.InfrasourceOld Republic Insurance CompanyADJ8493192ADJ8386046Deputy Commissioner
References
Case No. ADJ17849976
Regular
Oct 07, 2025

ESTEFANY MICHELLE OSORIO vs. SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, CORVEL CORPORATION

The Appeals Board observed a proposed settlement while reconsideration was pending. Citing California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 10961, which prohibits the District Office from acting on a case under reconsideration, the Board rescinded the prior decision from which reconsideration was sought. The matter is returned to the trial level, allowing the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) to review the proposed settlement. Should the WCJ not approve the settlement, the original decision may be reinstated, at which point any aggrieved party may seek reconsideration. This decision does not address the merits of the issues pending reconsideration.

ReconsiderationRescinded DecisionReturned to Trial LevelProposed SettlementWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJVan Nuys District OfficeSpace Exploration Technologies CorporationCorvel CorporationAdjudication Number
References
Case No. ADJ7793905, ADJ7793938
Regular
Feb 25, 2014

SHEDERICK FOWLKS vs. LUBE PIT STOP, INC., ADVANTAGE WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed a prior decision finding the applicant, Shderick Fowlks, not covered by workers' compensation. Fowlks, an officer and sole shareholder of Lube Pit Stop, Inc., was deemed an employee under Labor Code section 3351(c) but excluded from compensation coverage by section 4151(a) because the corporation lacked specific election through a compensation policy. The WCAB clarified that while officers are generally employees, sole shareholder-officers require election to be covered, which was not demonstrated here due to policy exclusions. Therefore, Fowlks' claims for injuries sustained while working for the corporation were dismissed.

Labor Code section 3351(c)corporate officersole shareholderworkers' compensation coverageelectioninsurance policyexclusionshamadministrative law judgePetition for Reconsideration
References
Showing 1-10 of 955 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