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. ADJ6824732
Regular
Sep 06, 2012

SHEILA CORREIA, KENNETH BURNETT (Deceased) vs. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, CHARTIS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns a deceased worker, Kenneth Burnett, diagnosed with mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure. The sole issue was determining the date of last injurious exposure to establish liability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the judge's decision. The judge found the applicant's medical expert's opinion on a five to ten-year latency period to be more persuasive than the defendant's expert's twenty-year period. This led to a finding that the decedent's last injurious asbestos exposure occurred between 1996 and 2001, during his employment with Verizon.

MesotheliomaLatency PeriodAsbestos ExposureDate of Last Injurious ExposureLC §5500.5LC §5412Verizon CommunicationsSedgwick Claims Management ServicesDr. LurosDr. Raybin
References
0
Case No. ADJ2678977 (VNO 0516619) ADJ2789939 (VNO 0516618)
Regular
Jul 26, 2017

THOMAS BELLISSIMO vs. CAST & CREW ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, ENTERTAINMENT PARTNERS, AIG

This case involves two insurers, Zurich and AIG, disputing liability for a worker's cumulative trauma injury. The Arbitrator initially set the liability period as July 4, 2004, to July 3, 2005, and apportioned fault based on days worked. Both insurers sought reconsideration, with AIG challenging the date of injury and allocation method, and Zurich arguing for apportionment based on exposure arduousness. The Board affirmed the Arbitrator's pro rata allocation based on days worked, but amended the liability period to June 28, 2004, to June 28, 2005, based on the last date of injurious exposure.

Labor Code section 5500.5cumulative trauma injuryliability periodapportionmentpro ratadate of injuryLabor Code section 5412disabilityinjurious exposuresuccessive employers
References
4
Case No. ADJ3477365 (LBO 0284280)
Regular
Mar 22, 2010

JAMES MASON vs. GARDEN GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award finding an air conditioning mechanic industrially injured by asbestos exposure and determined the last date of exposure and cumulative injury period. The Board rescinded the award, returning the case to the trial level to determine the applicant's date of injury under Labor Code Section 5412, which is crucial for assessing the statute of limitations and employer liability. The WCJ must also re-evaluate the asbestos exposure evidence and potentially the applicable Permanent Disability Rating Schedule based on the corrected date of injury.

Occupational diseaseAsbestos exposureCumulative injuryStatute of limitationsDate of injuryLabor Code Section 5500.5Labor Code Section 5412Petition for ReconsiderationQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Permanent disability
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Carlson-Fanelli v. St. Luke's Memorial Hospital Center

Claimant, with a history of multiple chemical sensitivity, developed illness due to workplace exposure to various chemicals and fumes while working as a dietetic technician in a hospital. Her symptoms worsened significantly over time, particularly after increasing exposure in the hospital's kitchen, eventually leading her to cease employment in June 1997. Initially, the Workers’ Compensation Board found an occupational disease but later issued an amended decision recognizing it as an accidental injury, which the employer and carrier appealed. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's amended decision, concluding there was substantial evidence that the claimant's preexisting condition was aggravated by her workplace environment. Medical testimony supported the finding that her exposure resulted in a totally disabling and permanent compensable injury.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryOccupational DiseaseChemical SensitivityMultiple Chemical SensitivityPreexisting ConditionAggravation of ConditionWorkplace ExposureMedical TestimonyDisability
References
7
Case No. ADJ2146690 (VNO 0489062)
Regular
Dec 02, 2011

SHING LING CHI vs. LA TRADE-TECHNICAL COLLEGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Supplemental Findings and Award. The Defendant's petition was found to misstate and present facts not in evidence, violating procedural rules. Medical evidence from AMEs Dr. Levine and Dr. Stalberg supported an industrial injury for the period of February 1999 through January 22, 2004, despite the Defendant's arguments. The Board affirmed that the applicant sustained a new period of temporary disability in 2004 due to this subsequent period of injurious exposure.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedContinuous Trauma InjuryOrthopedic InjuryFibromyalgiaPsychiatric InjurySupplemental Findings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeMedical Expert Opinion
References
1
Case No. ADJ4258158 (OXN 0128983) ADJ4450153 (OXN 0136267)
Regular
Jun 01, 2010

BRENDA K. ROACH vs. BRIDAL TRADITIONS, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves California Indemnity Insurance Company (CIIC) seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Arbitrator's decision. CIIC disputes the finding of a single cumulative trauma injury period and the assigned date of injury, arguing for a longer exposure period. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the prior findings to establish one cumulative trauma injury from March 5, 1999, through November 24, 2002. The original decision regarding CIIC's contribution claim against Preferred Employers Insurance Company was otherwise affirmed.

Cumulative traumaDate of injuryLabor Code section 5412Labor Code section 5500.5Petition for ContributionReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseAnti-merger statutesApportionment
References
2
Case No. ADJ1988743 (OAK 0328856)
Regular
Aug 10, 2012

JAMES KENDALL (Deceased) vs. OPENWAVE SYSTEMS, INC., AMERICAN PROTECTION INSURANCE CO., BROADSPIRE, A CRAWFORD CO., TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO. OF CONNECTICUT, LUMBERMEN'S MUTUAL CASUALTY CO.

This case concerns the determination of liability for a deceased worker's cumulative trauma injury, specifically carpal tunnel syndrome. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the period of injurious exposure. The Board found that the applicant's date of injury, based on the onset of temporary disability, was September 30, 2004. Therefore, the statutory period of liability under Labor Code § 5500.5 was established as September 30, 2003, through September 29, 2004, the employee's last day of work. This amendment impacts the contribution between insurers APIC and Travelers.

Cumulative traumaLabor Code section 5500.5Labor Code section 5412Period of liabilityCarpal tunnel syndromeTemporary disabilityPermanent disabilityDate of injuryInjurious exposureReconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ15875592; ADJ16732971
Regular
Aug 25, 2025

JAIME LLAMAS vs. CITY OF ANAHEIM, CITY OF DOWNEY

Applicant Jaime Llamas, a police officer, sustained a cumulative brain injury (cancer) while employed by the City of Downey and the City of Anaheim. The WCJ found both employers jointly and severally liable. Defendant City of Downey sought reconsideration, challenging the last injurious exposure and their liability for temporary disability. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original Findings and Award, and substituted new findings. The Board confirmed the cumulative injury, clarified employment periods, affirmed the industrial presumption for both employers, established a specific liability period (December 21, 2016, through December 21, 2017) based on medical evidence of latency, and deferred issues of contribution between the employers.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of AnaheimCity of DowneyLabor Code section 4850Labor Code section 3212.1Labor Code section 5500.5last injurious exposurecumulative injurypolice officerbrain cancer
References
40
Case No. ADJ7110663
Regular
May 09, 2016

WILLIAM BO MATTHEWS vs. SAN DIEGO CHARGERS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, NEW YORK GIANTS, INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA/ACE USA, DENVER GOLD, THE NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration of an arbitrator's decision regarding workers' compensation liability for a professional football player's cumulative trauma injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and modified the arbitrator's award, finding the applicant sustained two separate cumulative trauma injuries due to distinct periods of employment exposure. Consequently, the WCAB ruled that the petitioner, Insurance Company of North America/ACE USA (ESIS), is not liable for contribution to another insurer, The North River Insurance Company (NRIC), which had mistakenly paid a portion of a settlement. The Board affirmed the finding of two injuries, citing a significant break in employment as creating separate compensable periods, but rescinded the award to NRIC, holding NRIC should recover nothing from ESIS.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationArbitration DecisionContributionCumulative InjuryProfessional Football PlayerInsurance Company of North America/ACE USAZenith Insurance CompanyThe North River Insurance CompanyLabor Code Section 5500.5
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Depczynski v. Adsco/Farrar & Trefts

This case addresses a workers' compensation claim for occupational hearing loss, focusing on the interpretation of Workers’ Compensation Law § 49-bb concerning the 90-day limitations period. The central question is whether 'knowledge' to trigger this period requires a formal medical diagnosis or the claimant's admitted awareness of the injury and its work-related cause is sufficient. The claimant, employed by Farrar & Trefts (later Adsco Manufacturing Corp.), experienced significant noise exposure and recognized his hearing loss and its occupational link in 1980. However, he did not receive a medical diagnosis until January 1991, having filed his claim in December 1989. The Workers’ Compensation Board dismissed the claim as untimely, finding the claimant had knowledge in 1980, but the Appellate Division reversed, requiring a medical diagnosis for 'knowledge.' The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division, ruling that the claimant's admitted awareness of his injury and its cause in 1980 initiated the limitations period, irrespective of a formal medical diagnosis. Consequently, the court deemed the claim, filed over two years from the disablement date, as untimely and dismissed it.

Occupational hearing lossWorkers' Compensation LawStatute of LimitationsDelayed discovery ruleMedical diagnosis requirementCausation awarenessEmployer liabilityInsurance carrierJudicial interpretationWorkers' Compensation Board
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 13,994 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