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. ADJ6438203, ADJ8190271
Regular
Dec 13, 2018

SANDRA BROOKS vs. E. I. DUPONT, BROADSPIRE

This case involves an applicant with industrial injuries to her knees and spine sustained in 2002 and 2003, who continued to work for the defendant employer, receiving pay raises, until her temporary disability began in 2007. The defendant disputed the calculation of the applicant's temporary disability rate, advocating for a rate based on pre-injury wages. The Board affirmed the prior order, clarifying that the temporary disability rate should be based on the applicant's actual wages earned at the time her temporary disability commenced in 2007, recognizing her post-injury wage progression.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSandra BrooksE. I. DupontBroadsPIREADJ6438203ADJ8190271Opinion and Decision After Reconsiderationindustrial injuriesbilateral kneeslumbar spine
References
Case No. ADJ7410586
Regular
May 18, 2012

Randall Salcido vs. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the applicant's temporary disability benefits should be based on his earnings as a teacher on the date of injury. The defendant argued that benefits should be based on the applicant's lower subsequent earnings as a warehouse supervisor, as the transfer was anticipated. However, the Board held that the applicant's actual earnings as a teacher reflected his earning capacity and that the lower warehouse supervisor wage was an aberrant basis for calculation. The Board also noted that using the lower wage would incentivize employers to downsize to reduce liability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactDisability BenefitsVocational TeacherEarnings CalculationTemporary DisabilityAverage Weekly EarningsEarning CapacityLabor Code Section 4453
References
Case No. ADJ7350346
Regular
Jan 05, 2012

TENNE PHAM vs. HAWAIIAN GARDEN CASINO, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This order denies Tenne Pham's Petition for Removal in a workers' compensation case against Hawaiian Garden Casino and Travelers Insurance Company. The Appeals Board adopted the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge, denying the removal. Additionally, the Board ordered a correction of a clerical error in a previous order to remove one of the case numbers from the caption. Therefore, the Petition for Removal is denied, and the prior order is amended.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeClerical ErrorDenying RemovalCorrecting Clerical ErrorStrike Case NumberOrder Denying RemovalADJ3545303ADJ7350346
References
Case No. ADJ17198125
Regular
Apr 28, 2025

Danny Pham vs. Garff Enterprises, Inc., Zurich American Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendants, Garff Enterprises, Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Company, in the case of Danny Pham. The petition challenged an interlocutory finding related to the applicant's psychiatric injury. The Board concluded that no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denying removal, and reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if needed later. The decision also discussed the application of Labor Code section 5909 regarding the timeline for Board action and Labor Code section 4660.1 concerning the distinction between directly caused and compensable consequence psychiatric injuries.

WCABreconsiderationremovalLabor Code § 5909Adjudication Numberthreshold issuecompensable consequencepsychiatric injuryPQME§ 4660.1(c)
References
Case No. ADJ1437076 (ANA 0355949), ADJ2064657 (ANA 0355947), ADJ3681784 (ANA 0355948), ADJ495794 (ANA 0355945), ADJ1053460 (ANA 0355946)
Regular
Sep 12, 2019

Ernest Martinez vs. THE HARTFORD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed the Workers' Compensation Judge's findings with minor amendments. The Board clarified the award for temporary disability in one claim and corrected clerical errors in another. The applicant, an attorney, raised multiple contentions regarding various injuries, including disputes over permanent disability awards, apportionment of psychiatric disability, and defendant's alleged non-compliance with prior orders. The Board largely adopted the Judge's reasoning, finding Dr. Cohen's apportionment of psychiatric disability to be substantial evidence and rejecting arguments for a single combined permanent disability award.

ADJ1437076ADJ2064657ADJ3681784ADJ495794ADJ1053460Petition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings Awards and OrdersWCJCumulative TraumaHeart Injury
References
Case No. ADJ10837041
Regular
Mar 16, 2026

STEPHEN MERRILL vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

This case involves applicant Stephen Merrill seeking removal of a WCJ's order that found a panel QME's reports unsubstantial. The WCJ deferred the injury AOE/COE issue and ordered further record development. The Appeals Board denied removal, deeming it an extraordinary remedy not warranted here as no irreparable harm was shown and reconsideration remains an adequate remedy. The Board affirmed the WCJ's discretion to develop the record when medical evidence is deficient.

ADJ10837041Petition for RemovalFindings of Fact and Orderpanel qualified medical evaluatorQMEDr. Cao Van Phamsubstantial medical evidenceAOE/COEheart trouble presumptionLabor Code section 3212.2
References
Case No. ADJ7432904
Regular
Sep 24, 2012

NEDA MOTAVAKEL vs. FANTASTIC SAM'S, TOWER SELECT INSURANCE CO., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLP, STAR INSURANCE CO., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLP, ENDURANCE WORKERS' COMPENSATION, SOUTHERN INSURANCE CO., FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

This case involves an appeal by Star and Tower Insurance Companies regarding a workers' compensation award. The primary issue is the applicant's average weekly earnings, specifically the inclusion of tip income, which was not adequately substantiated by documentary evidence. The Appeals Board found the initial decision lacked substantial evidence regarding earnings and rescinded the award. The matter is remanded for further proceedings to properly develop the evidentiary record on earnings and insurance coverage dates before a new decision is issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNeda MotavakelFantastic Sam'sTower Select Insurance CompanyStar Insurance CompanyIllinois Midwest Insurance AgencyLLEndurance Workers' CompensationSouthern Insurance CompanyFirstComp Omaha
References
Case No. ADJ16326594
Regular
Oct 31, 2025

Peter Pham vs. Southern California Edison

Defendant sought removal of a WCJ's December 12, 2023 Findings of Fact and Order (F&O), which denied their motion for a replacement Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The defendant argued that the applicant's email to the QME constituted impermissible ex parte contact. The Appeals Board granted the petition for removal, rescinding the F&O, and substituting new Findings of Fact that the email was indeed impermissible ex parte contact, thereby ordering a replacement QME panel. Additionally, while earlier QME reports and deposition testimony by Dr. Weiss remain in evidence, her report dated July 22, 2023, was stricken to preserve the appearance of impartiality in the medical evaluation process.

Ex parte contactQualified Medical EvaluatorRemoval petitionFindings of Fact and OrderLabor Code Section 4062.3Appearance of impartialityMedical evaluation processReplacement QME panelPsychiatric injuryStipulated facts
References
Case No. ADJ4028210 (SJO 0251585)
Regular
Apr 06, 2009

JENNY PHAM vs. SANMINA-SCI CORPORATION, SENTRY CLAIMS SERVICE

This case concerns a dispute over the reasonableness and necessity of chiropractic and acupuncture treatment provided to an applicant for an industrial injury. The defendant argues the treatment exceeded the ACOEM Guidelines and was not evidence-based. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the WCJ's prior decision allowing the lien premature. The Board rescinded the decision and returned the case for further development of the medical record to determine if the treatment complied with the ACOEM Guidelines. The defendant's petition for removal was dismissed as moot.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBilateral ShouldersReasonable and Necessary TreatmentACOEM GuidelinesLabor Code Section 4600
References
Case No. SJO 0251585
Regular
Dec 14, 2007

JENNY PHAM vs. SANMINA-SCI CORPORATION, SENTRY CLAIMS SERVICE

The defendant, Sanmina-Sci Corporation, petitioned for removal, seeking to vacate a trial date due to their counsel's alleged lack of notice for a mandatory settlement conference. However, the trial has already proceeded on the scheduled date. Because the matter has gone to trial, the petition for removal is moot. Any grievances the defendant has with the trial judge's rulings can be addressed through a petition for reconsideration.

Petition for removalMandatory settlement conferencePrejudiceIrreparably harmedMinutes of HearingSummary of EvidenceLien claimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCAB Rule 10843Moot
References
Showing 1-10 of 11 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