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. 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. ADJ13228350
Regular
Jul 14, 2025

Paul Janikowski vs. Tesla Motors, Inc.

Applicant Paul Janikowski, a production associate at Tesla Motors, Inc., suffered severe leg and ankle injuries in 2019 due to a machine malfunction involving a conveyor and skids. He alleged serious and willful misconduct by Tesla, arguing that the company failed to provide adequate safety protocols and reduced the job from a two-person task to a one-person task, forcing him to cross an energized conveyor. Despite defendant's arguments that safety protocols were in place and the operation met industry standards, the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) found that the applicant met his burden of proof. The Appeals Board denied Tesla's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding of serious and willful misconduct by the employer.

Serious and willful misconductLabor Code section 4553Petition for ReconsiderationFindings Order and AwardWCJCal OSHAMercer-FraserJohns-ManvilleHawaiian PineappleDowden
References
Case No. ADJ2436436
Regular
Aug 01, 2019

CLEMENTE CASTRO vs. EDEN ROSE FARMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Clemente Castro's Petition for Reconsideration regarding his claim for serious and willful misconduct. The Board adopted the WCJ's report which found the claim barred by the statute of limitations under Labor Code section 5407. The WCJ determined that while the original application listed Labor Code section 4553, it did not meet the pleading requirements for a serious and willful misconduct claim. Furthermore, applicant failed to properly serve the employer with the petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and willful misconductStatute of limitationsLabor Code section 4553Labor Code section 5407Petition for ReconsiderationApplication for Adjudication of ClaimWCJ reportPetition for Increased BenefitsElectro cution
References
Case No. ADJ9427877
Regular
Apr 20, 2020

KARL KURTZ vs. WESCO AIRCRAFT HARDWARE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an employer's termination of an employee while he was on temporary disability due to a back injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the finding that the termination violated Labor Code section 132a, finding the employer's stated reasons of relocation and claim denial constituted unlawful discrimination. While the employee is entitled to lost wage reimbursement from June 1, 2016, to October 9, 2018, issues regarding reinstatement and further wage loss remain deferred for further proceedings. The Board also affirmed the finding that the employee's injury was not due to his own serious and willful misconduct.

Labor Code Section 132aserious and willful misconductdiscriminationretaliationreinstatementlost wagestemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityserious and willful misconduct of employeeserious and willful misconduct of employer
References
Case No. ADJ10110995
Regular
Oct 05, 2016

PRESTON LEE BROWN SCOTT vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The applicant sought reconsideration of an order that he claimed was issued January 11, 2016, arguing a Compromise and Release did not settle his serious and willful misconduct claim. The Board dismissed the petition as untimely, noting the applicant filed his petition significantly late. Even if considered timely, the Board would have denied it on the merits, as a prior decision had already approved a Compromise and Release excluding the 132a claim. The Board clarified that while 132a claims are not subject to ADR, serious and willful misconduct claims are.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseArbitratorAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)Serious and Willful MisconductLabor Code Section 132aTimelinessOpinion and Order Dismissing PetitionDivision 4
References
Case No. ADJ7300708
Regular
Mar 30, 2015

ALEJANDRO VALENCIA MAGANA (Deceased) BEATRIZ VALENCIA (Widow) vs. HALOPOFF \u0026 SONS, INC., SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.

The applicant sought to join John Halopoff, Sr. as a defendant in a serious and willful misconduct claim filed after the statute of limitations had expired. The Appeals Board granted Halopoff's petition for removal, rescinding the order to join him as a party. This decision was based on the principle that a new defendant cannot be added after the statute of limitations has run, absent specific exceptions like ignorance of identity or misleading conduct. Because the applicant was aware of Halopoff's identity and there was no evidence of misrepresentation, the joinder was deemed untimely.

Serious and Willful MisconductPetition for RemovalOrder of JoinderStatute of LimitationsSuccessor LiabilityDeath CaseIndustrial InjuryEmployer MisconductLabor Code Section 5407Doe Defendant
References
Case No. ADJ2628913
Regular
Jan 02, 2014

BARRY BLAYLOCK vs. NEGHEBORN AUTO CENTER, dba NEBHEBORN LINCOLN MERCURY, et al

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding a finding of serious and willful misconduct. The applicant sustained a permanent and total disability due to lung damage caused by heavy workplace smoking, specifically by a coworker in an enclosed office. Despite repeated complaints and an emergency room visit, the employer knowingly permitted the violation of a workplace smoking prohibition. The Board found sufficient evidence of employer knowledge of the safety order and the resulting harm to the applicant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code Section 4553Reconsideration DeniedPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCredibility FindingSerious and WillfulViolation of Safety OrderWorkplace Smoking Prohibition
References
Case No. ADJ1245747 (BAK 0140714)
Regular
Jul 14, 2009

BALDEMAR SANCHEZ vs. KINLEY CONSTRUCTION, AIG COSTA MESA

The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's finding that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct, thus denying additional benefits under Labor Code § 4553. The applicant had previously settled his industrial injury claim for $60,000, but the settlement explicitly excluded the serious and willful misconduct claim. The Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that the employer's conduct, while negligent, did not rise to the level of serious and willful misconduct. The Board also noted the applicant's petition violated procedural rules regarding spacing, cautioning counsel for future compliance.

Serious and Willful MisconductLabor Code § 4553Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact & AwardCompromise & ReleaseIndustrial InjuryPelvis InjuryHip InjuryAbdomen InjuryBilateral Knees Injury
References
Case No. ADJ1528452 (LAO 0884582)
Regular
Mar 05, 2009

ARACELY LUGO, JOSE LUGO vs. A. RIVERA TRUCKING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a workers' compensation death claim for Jose Lugo, with Aracely Lugo as the applicant. The defendant, A. Rivera Trucking, Inc. and State Compensation Insurance Fund, sought removal from the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) after their request to delay a mandatory settlement conference for further discovery on dependency issues was denied. The defendant also objected to the bifurcation of the Serious and Willful Misconduct claim, arguing it would cause prejudice. The WCAB denied the petition for removal, adopting the WCJ's report which found the defendant had not demonstrated due diligence in pursuing discovery and had previously stipulated to bifurcating the Serious and Willful Misconduct claim.

Petition for RemovalDenying RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDependency IssueSerious and Willful Misconduct PetitionBifurcationDeath ClaimCrushed PelvisApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ9073927
Regular
Oct 08, 2015

CHRISTOPHER EASTWOOD (Deceased), MARGARET EASTWOOD (Widow) vs. COOPER CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denying serious and willful misconduct. The applicant's widow argued the employer's negligence caused her husband's death from heat exposure due to inadequate precautions. However, the Board found the evidence did not support serious and willful misconduct, citing the employer's provision of shade, water, and frequent breaks. Furthermore, the petition for reconsideration itself was procedurally flawed by being unverified and single-spaced.

Serious and willful misconductheat exposureAOE/COEWCJPetition for ReconsiderationCal/OSHALabor Code section 4553employer liabilityburden of proofquasi-criminal nature
References
Showing 1-10 of 13,681 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