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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a denial of workers' compensation benefits, which was based on the finding that his claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board affirmed the denial, concluding that the applicant's job abandonment led to a termination prior to the filing of his claims. The Board also determined that the employer properly denied both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating a presumption of compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeApplicantDefendantRalphs Grocery CompanySecurity GuardIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ10153514 ADJ10605281
Regular
Sep 30, 2019

ROBERTO CARDENAS vs. SANTA ISABEL ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a VALLARTA, SAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant alleging a specific injury to his right wrist, hand, and shoulder from a machine malfunction. The original Findings and Orders denied the claim, finding the applicant not credible, particularly due to discrepancies with a First Aid and Injury Notice. The Appeals Board rescinded this decision, finding that the WCJ failed to address the credible testimony of a eyewitness. The matter was returned for further proceedings to clarify evidence and credibility issues.

ADJ10153514ADJ10605281ROBERTO CARDENASSANTA ISABEL ENTERPRISESVALLARTASAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANYHAZELRIGG CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESWORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDOPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONFindings and Orders
References
Case No. ADJ8739571
Regular
Dec 11, 2015

MARVIN BENARD vs. SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS, ACE INSURANCE COMPANY, U.S. FIDELITY AND GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's decision, finding the applicant's claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The Board determined the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving the applicant had actual knowledge of his workers' compensation rights more than one year before filing his claim. Crucially, the defendant did not provide notice of these rights, and the applicant's knowledge of his injury's industrial cause did not equate to knowledge of his rights to benefits. Therefore, the case was returned for further proceedings.

Cumulative traumaStatute of limitationsDate of injuryKnowledge of rightsTollingAffirmative defenseReconsiderationBurden of proofProfessional athleteNotice of rights
References
Case No. ADJ1950726 (MON 0361748), ADJ6963803, ADJ7198723
Regular
Mar 20, 2012

DANA BURREL vs. LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

In three workers' compensation cases, the applicant sustained industrial injuries to her upper extremities on May 21, 2006, March 11, 2008, and July 28, 2008. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the application of Labor Code section 4658(d)(2), which mandates a 15% increase in permanent disability payments when an employer fails to offer suitable work within 60 days of an injury becoming permanent and stationary. The employer stipulated to providing some medical treatment and returning the applicant to work, but failed to offer regular, modified, or alternative work for 12 months post-injury. The Board found the employer's contention of denial unsubstantiated by evidence and, following *Bontempo v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.*, ruled that the 15% increase applies to all three cases.

Labor Code section 4658(d)(2)permanent disability increaseindustrial injuryright upper extremityright handright wristright shoulderright armleft wristleft hand
References
Case No. ADJ17569878
Regular
Apr 28, 2025

Marvin Pineda Contreras vs. Southwest Plastering, Inc.; Zenith Insurance Company

Lien Claimant Oracle Imaging Riverside sought reconsideration of an Order Dismissing Lien issued on December 23, 2024, by the WCJ, following its alleged failure to object to a notice of intention to dismiss. Oracle contended it had not received proper notice of the hearing date, attributing this to the Appeals Board not sending notifications to its P.O. Box. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as premature, returning the matter to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the Petition as one seeking to set aside the Order Dismissing Lien. The Board noted that any aggrieved party may seek reconsideration after the WCJ issues a subsequent decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantNotice of IntentionFailure to AttendProper NoticeBad AddressReport and RecommendationCompromise and Release AgreementOrder Approving Compromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ8613826
Regular
May 02, 2016

WALTER D. VILLATORO vs. POTENTIAL INDUSTRIES, ZURICH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded an order dismissing lien claimant Innovative Orthopedic Services' lien. The lien claimant argued it was denied due process because it never received notice of a lien conference or a Notice of Intention to Dismiss (NIT). The WCAB found that the lien claimant's due process rights were violated due to a lack of record of proper service of the NIT and any further lien conference notice. Therefore, the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DismissCompromise and ReleaseDue processNotice of Lien ConferenceAdministrative law judgeRescindVoid ab initio
References
Case No. ADJ8868906
Regular
Feb 22, 2016

MICHELLE CANCHOLA vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration that was dismissed because it was filed from a non-final order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) clarified that reconsideration is only available for final orders that determine substantive rights, liabilities, or threshold issues. An interlocutory procedural decision, such as a notice of intent to dismiss a lien for failure to appear at a conference, is not a final order. While the petition was dismissed, it will be considered as a timely objection to the notice of intent to dismiss.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-final orderFinal orderSubstantive right or liabilityThreshold issueInterlocutoryProcedural decisionsEvidentiary decisionsLien claimantNotice of Intent to dismiss
References
Case No. ADJ19527341
Regular
May 05, 2025

MARIA RAMIREZ vs. ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Applicant Maria Ramirez sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge's order, which found no industrial injury. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's decision, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board determined that the WCJ's credibility finding, based on the delayed worsening of symptoms, required expert medical opinion to ascertain consistency with the claimed injury mechanism, thus necessitating further development of the medical and factual record.

ADJ19527341Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryRight Arm InjuryRight Wrist InjuryRight Hip InjuryRight Leg InjuryRight Foot InjuryWCJ Credibility Determination
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,268 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