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. ADJ6580753
Regular
Jun 28, 2012

RICHARD AVILA vs. PIERCE ENTERPRISES, CALIFORNIA SELF INSURERS SECURITY FUND (ESTATE CONTRACTOR'S ACCESS PROGRAM/SIG, THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR - METRO RISK MANAGEMENT)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from an interlocutory order, not a final decision determining substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Additionally, the petition violated WCAB rules regarding excess attachments. The Judge's report, which adopted the WCAB's reasoning, recommended denial based on the interlocutory nature of the order and the applicant's potential for future compliance.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityMedical ExaminationMileage CheckTravel Expenses
References
Case No. ADJ1807866 (VNO 0555240)
Regular
Nov 06, 2013

ELVIRA ANAYA vs. GRIMMWAY ENTERPRISES, TRISTAR

This case involves Elvira Anaya's workers' compensation claims against Grimmway Enterprises. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by an applicant/defendant/lien claimant. The dismissal is due to the petition being filed untimely, as it was submitted more than 25 days after the Order Amending Finding of Fact issued on July 5, 2013. This failure to meet the statutory filing deadline under Labor Code section 5903 and Code of Civil Procedure section 1013 mandates the dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissalWCABLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013Order Amending Finding of Factadministrative law judgeGrimmway EnterprisesTristar
References
Case No. ADJ632345
Regular
Nov 18, 2008

MICHAEL GREEN vs. PATRIOT ENTERPRISES dba PATRIOT PLUMBING

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the finding that defendant Patriot Enterprises committed serious and willful misconduct causing the applicant's industrial injury. The Board found the defendant's foreman witnessed and failed to address dangerous conduct (working at heights without fall protection) that led to the injury. This failure, along with other evidence, supported the $50\%$ compensation increase for the applicant.

Serious and Willful ViolationPatriot EnterprisesPlumberIndustrial InjuryLabor Code section 4553Petition for ReconsiderationBurden of ProofDangerous ConditionOSHA investigatorAllan Johns
References
Case No. ADJ4115739 (VNO 0487593)
Regular

ZACH WALZ vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS; RISK ENTERPRISE 2314 BREA

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, concerning applicant Zach Walz against defendants Arizona Cardinals and Risk Enterprise, resulted in an order granting a petition for reconsideration. All future case-related communications are to be directed to the Commissioners' Office in San Francisco, pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration. The order was dated and filed on October 11, 2001.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationCommissioners' OfficeADJ4115739VNO 0487593VNO 0487351VNO 0487591VNO 0487592Arizona Cardinals
References
Case No. ADJ 1398270 (VNO 0553926)
Regular
May 12, 2016

JESUS JOSE RAMIREZ vs. ZIXTA ENTERPRISES, SPRINGFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY

In *Ramirez v. ZIxta Enterprises*, both applicant and defendant filed petitions for reconsideration of a workers' compensation judge's Findings and Award. However, the judge timely issued an order vacating the original award and setting the matter for a conference within 15 days of the reconsideration petitions. Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed both petitions for reconsideration as moot. The vacatur rendered the original award and the subsequent petitions for its review ineffective.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeAmended Order Vacating OrderRule 10859DismissedApplicantDefendantSpringfield Insurance Company
References
Case No. ADJ9686274
Regular
Dec 04, 2019

LEON REINGOLD vs. LARG ENTERPRISES dba HIGH STAR AUTO CENTER, AMTRUST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration in the case of Leon Reingold v. LARG ENTERPRISES. The Board adopted the findings of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), who determined that the applicant did not sustain an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The ALJ's decision was based on significant credibility issues with the applicant's testimony and inconsistent medical history provided. The loss of surveillance video evidence, which was under the applicant's control, further supported the denial.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedWCJ credibility determinationIndustrial injuryCourse of employmentContradictory testimonyPre-existing conditionsContemporaneous medical reportLoss of video evidenceLabor Code § 3600
References
Case No. ADJ8594071
Regular
May 15, 2018

STEPHEN RANDALL vs. DTM ENTERPRISES, INC., PRECISION DOOR SERVICE, DONALD TAYLOR, JACQUELYN TAYLOR, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, LUMBERMEN'S UNDERWRITING, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS' BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied DTM Enterprises' petition for reconsideration. DTM argued the judge erred in finding the applicant solely employed by them and that the case should be handled by an arbitrator due to an insurance dispute. However, the applicant testified he only received direction and pay from DTM, never heard of Tri-State, and no evidence of a dual employment contract was presented. The Board found no indication of employment by any entity other than DTM and that insurance coverage disputes are separate from employment determinations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDTM EnterprisesPrecision Door ServiceDonald TaylorJacquelyn TaylorCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationLumbermen's UnderwritingUninsured Employers' Benefits Trust Fundgeneral/special employmentcontractual issue
References
Case No. ADJ4357722 (SBR 0307145) ADJ5714365
Regular
Jun 06, 2012

ANASTASIA JENKINS vs. NEXT ENTERPRISES, INC.

This case involves Anastasia Jenkins' workers' compensation claim against Next Enterprises and the California Insurance Guarantee Association. The Second Appellate District affirmed the Appeals Board's decision that Pinnacle Lien Services could represent multiple lien claimants. The appellate court remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. The Appeals Board is now returning the case to the trial level for the workers' compensation judge to conduct necessary proceedings and issue decisions.

ADJ4357722ADJ5714365Anastacia JenkinsNext Enterprises Inc.California Insurance Guarantee AssociationVillanova Insurance liquidationOracle ImagingN-CareNations Surgery CenterPinnacle Lien Services
References
Case No. SJO 244847
Regular
Feb 06, 2008

Celestine Lewis vs. COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES, INC.

This case concerns Celestine Lewis's claim against Coca-Cola Enterprises for workers' compensation benefits. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Lewis's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision regarding the apportionment of her permanent disability. The WCAB adopted the Administrative Law Judge's report, which upheld the apportionment of 30% of Lewis's permanent disability to pre-existing arthritis, consistent with recent legislative changes emphasizing apportionment to causative factors including pathology.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCelestine LewisCoca-Cola EnterprisesInc.Permissibly Self-InsuredPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeDivision of Workers' CompensationJudicial AuthorityOriginal Jurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ6650757
Regular
Nov 05, 2010

SANTOS BUENO vs. GOLDEN TREE HARVEST ENTERPRISES, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Santos Bueno, versus Golden Tree Harvest Enterprises and Zenith Insurance Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has issued an order denying reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB adopted the findings of the administrative law judge and found no basis to overturn the initial ruling. Therefore, the petitions for reconsideration have been officially denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSANTOS BUENOGOLDEN TREE HARVEST ENTERPRISESZENITH INSURANCE COMPANYADJ6650757San Fernando District OfficeORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATIONPetitions for Reconsiderationworkers' compensation administrative law judgedenial of reconsideration
References
Showing 1-10 of 283 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