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. ADJ10749554
Regular
Nov 06, 2018

APRIL SIMMONS COOK vs. DESERT OASIS HEALTHCARE, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a dispute over whether defendant's communication with a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) violated Labor Code section 4062.3. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and removal, rescinding the original Findings and Award. The WCAB will return the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ. This action is taken to align the decision with the recent en banc opinion in *Suon v. California Dairies* regarding violations of section 4062.3.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalEx Parte CommunicationLabor Code Section 4062.3Qualified Medical EvaluatorAttorney's FeesFindings and AwardEn Banc DecisionSuon v. California DairiesRescinded
References
1
Case No. ADJ9660298
Regular
Mar 01, 2017

ZOILA DELGADO vs. EL POLLO LOCO, SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION, CORVEL CORPORATION

This case concerns a defendant's petition for removal after a Workers' Compensation Judge denied their request for a replacement Qualified Medical Examiner (QME). The defendant alleged the applicant violated Labor Code section 4062.3 by improperly sending medical records to the QME, which the parties had agreed should be withheld. The Appeals Board granted removal, finding the WCJ's decision was not based on admitted evidence and lacked an Opinion on Decision. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings before a new WCJ.

Petition for RemovalReplacement PQME panelLabor Code section 4062.3improperly sent medical recordsQualified Medical ExaminerWCJMinute Orderrescindedreturned to trial leveladmitted evidence
References
7
Case No. ADJ2603160
Regular
Jan 17, 2012

ROOSEVELT WARDELL vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal in this case, rescinded the Administrative Law Judge's October 13, 2011 Order Compelling Applicant's Attendance at Medical Evaluation, and returned the matter to the trial level. The Board adopted the WCJ's report as the basis for this decision. No opinion was offered on other issues raised in the removal petition, including sanctions.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalGranting RemovalRescind OrderCompelling AttendanceMedical EvaluationTrial LevelFurther ProceedingsWCJDecision After Removal
References
0
Case No. ADJ6659106
Regular
Dec 23, 2013

CLEMENCIA ESTRADA vs. BELLFLOWER UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, HOME IN SOCIAL SERVICES (HISS)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal in this case. Consequently, the Board rescinded the WCJ's prior decision and returned the matter for further proceedings. This action was based on the WCJ's report, which the Board adopted and incorporated into its opinion. The case will now proceed with new findings and a decision by the WCJ.

Petition for RemovalGranting RemovalRescind DecisionReturn to WCJDecision After RemovalWorkers Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeFurther ProceedingsOpinion and OrderApplicant
References
0
Case No. ADJ9972033
Regular
Aug 18, 2015

BRIAN DEL ROSARIO vs. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., LIBERY INSURANCE

The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's mootness order, and remanded the case for a decision on the merits of the employer's motion to quash. The employer argued that a subpoena duces tecum for ten years of employment records was overly broad and burdensome, and reconsideration later would not be adequate. The Board found the employer demonstrated substantial prejudice and irreparable harm due to the breadth of the request and a drafting error in the original motion. A dissenting opinion argued removal was inappropriate as the employer's error, not the WCJ's, created the issue, and the employer had an adequate remedy by refiling.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalSubpoena Duces TecumMotion to QuashMootnessSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWCJAdministrative Law JudgeDiscovery Dispute
References
2
Case No. ADJ7457215
Regular
Feb 28, 2014

MARYA PARENTE vs. CITY OF INGLEWOOD, INTEGRATED CLAIMS

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer in four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's order to take the case off calendar for further development of the record. The Board found that Dr. Rodas' reports, providing a 25% whole person impairment rating, constituted substantial evidence and that the record was sufficient for decision. The central dispute concerns whether Dr. Rodas correctly applied the AMA Guides to place the applicant at the higher end of a disability classification based on pulmonary dysfunction. The case is returned to the trial level for decision based on the existing record, with the Board expressing no opinion on the correct disability rating.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating SubmissionAmerican Medical Association (AMA) GuidesWhole Person Impairment (WPI)Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Permanent Disability (PD)Activities of Daily Living (ADL)Functional Capacity LossPulmonary DysfunctionOccupational Category
References
2
Case No. ADJ4522242 (VNO 0452421) ADJ522765 (VNO 0452422)
Regular
May 26, 2011

PAUL ALLGOOD vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted lien claimant's petition for removal to rescind an Administrative Law Judge's order compelling Dr. Baden's appearance at trial. The Board found no good cause was established for Dr. Baden's direct examination and that the order was not a final, appealable decision. Removal was granted to prevent prejudice to the lien claimant, and the order for Dr. Baden's appearance was rescinded. The Board also dismissed the lien claimant's prior petition for reconsideration.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ OrderDr. Scott BadenGood CauseMedical WitnessDirect ExaminationWritten ReportsBoard Rule 10606
References
11
Case No. ADJ1631280
Regular
Sep 02, 2025

FAREED ROSHANDELL vs. TRANSFORM SR HOLDING MANAGEMENT LLC/TRANSFORMCO, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Fareed Roshandell, who previously sustained injuries, sought reconsideration of a June 3, 2025 decision by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The WCJ had taken the matter off calendar and made findings without an evidentiary record, including deeming a medical report invalid and noting service irregularities. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration but granted the petition to treat it as a petition for removal. Citing due process violations and the lack of an evidentiary record, the Board rescinded the WCJ's June 3, 2025 decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with their opinion.

RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationUtilization ReviewRequest for AuthorizationMedical-Legal ReportSanctionsHome Health AidePhysician's AssistantDue ProcessEvidentiary Hearing
References
16
Case No. ADJ2202146 (SAC 0332118)
Regular
Jul 12, 2009

THERESE HOLLAND vs. SAN JOSE F9 AGENCY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a decision that found no industrial injury and removed a related order from the trial level. The Board found the exclusion of applicant's Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) reports was an error, as they were obtained under former Labor Code section 4060 regarding compensability. The matter is returned to trial for defendant to cross-examine the QME and obtain rebuttal opinions, after which a new decision will be issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQMELabor Code Section 4060Cumulative TraumaIndustrial InjuryUpper ExtremitiesAccountant
References
0
Case No. ADJ7785865
Regular

FABIOLA MARTINEZ vs. PRIORITY BUSINESS SERVICES, INC., TRAVELERS

The defendant sought removal of the WCJ's order rescinding a Compromise and Release (C&R), arguing the applicant's petition to set aside was untimely. The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition due to improper service. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion, rescinded the WCJ's order, and returned the matter for a hearing on the applicant's petition to set aside the C&R. This decision acknowledges the applicant's petition was indeed untimely, but asserts the Board's authority to review the C&R for good cause under Labor Code section 5803.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition to Set Asideuntimely petitionPro Per ApplicantWCJremoval on Appeals Board motionGood CauseLabor Code Section 5803
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 29,788 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