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. ADJ1703796
Regular
Sep 05, 2025

Diane Minish vs. Hanuman Fellowship, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Applicant Diane Minish sought reconsideration of a Findings and Order (F&O) issued by a WCJ on January 22, 2021, which found she did not rebut the presumption of receiving an Order Dismissing her case. Minish contended she was not served with the Order Dismissing and that due process requires actual notice. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the record and concluded that Minish successfully rebutted the presumption of receipt, giving great weight to the WCJ's credibility determinations regarding her testimony of non-receipt. The WCAB found that the failure to provide adequate notice and opportunity to be heard violated due process and constituted good cause to set aside the Order Dismissing. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the original F&O, granted Minish's Petition to Vacate, and rescinded the Order Dismissing her case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationNotice of IntentionOrder DismissingPresumption of ReceiptRebuttedGood CausePetition to VacateDue ProcessSubstantial Justice
References
16
Case No. ADJ13057590; ADJ13058223
Regular
Aug 25, 2025

HEATHER RAMOS vs. PIH HEALTH, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

Applicant Heather Ramos sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings of Fact and Orders (F&O) which found defendant PIH Health and Athens Administrators had provided proof of service for a supplemental job displacement voucher (SJDV). The WCJ applied the presumption of timely mailing and receipt, finding applicant failed to rebut it and was not entitled to a penalty. Applicant contended there was no valid proof of service, and defendant did not meet the burden to invoke the presumption, thus entitling her to a penalty and attorney's fees. The Appeals Board upheld the WCJ's decision, concluding that the defendant's proof of service was valid, and applicant's evidence was insufficient to overcome the mailing presumption, therefore denying reconsideration.

Supplemental Job Displacement VoucherPresumption of ReceiptMailbox RuleProof of ServiceRebuttal EvidenceWCABPetition for ReconsiderationPenaltiesAttorney's FeesLabor Code Section 5814
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State v. International Fidelity Insurance

The State (plaintiff) sought summary judgment against International Fidelity Insurance Company (IFIC) (defendant) to recover on surety bonds issued for Golden Distributors, LTD, after Golden's checks for cigarette tax stamps were dishonored. IFIC claimed the bonds were terminated via certified mail in 1989, but the Department of Taxation and Finance denied receipt. The court ruled that IFIC's failure to produce certified mail return receipts or white slips was fatal to their claim of "presumption of receipt" and that their office procedures were insufficient to establish proper mailing. Furthermore, the State's destruction of mail logs, done routinely, did not constitute spoliation as IFIC had not shown the logs were relevant to foreseeable litigation at the time of destruction. Consequently, the State's motion for summary judgment was granted, and IFIC's cross-motion was denied.

Summary JudgmentSpoliation of EvidenceCertified MailPresumption of ReceiptBond CancellationTax LawInsurance LawOffice ProceduresBurden of ProofEvidence Destruction
References
14
Case No. ADJ520347 (RIV 0067776) ADJ2129926 (RIV 0067769)
Regular
Oct 18, 2010

DAVID DEHOYOS vs. ROCK-A-FIRE PIZZA, SCIF INSURED INLAND EMPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award denying the applicant's claim. The WCAB found that crucial evidence regarding the employer's receipt date of the claim form was missing from the record. Therefore, the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine if the employer timely denied the claim within 90 days of receipt. If not, the employer may be presumed liable unless they can rebut the presumption with subsequently discovered evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial injuryCumulative traumaSpecific injuryFindings and AwardReconsiderationElectronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMSDWC-1 claim formDelay letter
References
2
Case No. ADJ8151109 ADJ8652587
Regular
Jun 04, 2019

GIANCARLO BERMUDEZ vs. TECHTRANS, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY, SUSSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES

This case involves lien claimant Scripte Corporation's petition for reconsideration after its lien was dismissed for failing to appear at a lien conference. Scripte claimed it did not receive notice of the conference, but the WCAB upheld the dismissal, finding the presumption of proper mail service was not rebutted by a bare declaration of non-receipt. Commissioner Gaffney dissented, arguing the office manager's declaration provided sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption and warrant a new hearing. The majority denied reconsideration based on the WCJ's reasoning, adopting it as their own.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ConferenceNotice of HearingGood CauseRebuttable PresumptionProof of ServiceCompromise and ReleaseWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ7485771
Regular
Sep 25, 2015

HUGO CANO vs. AMCOR PET PACKAGING, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration, which sought to overturn the dismissal of its lien. The dismissal occurred because the lien claimant failed to appear at a lien conference and subsequently failed to overcome the presumption of receipt of a Notice of Intention to Dismiss. Furthermore, the petition itself was unverified, providing an independent ground for denial under Labor Code section 5902. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding insufficient grounds for reconsideration based on the lack of evidence to rebut the mailing presumption and the unverified petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LiensLien ClaimantNotice of Intention to DismissService of ProcessProof of ServicePresumption of ReceiptUnverified PetitionLabor Code section 5902
References
0
Case No. ADJ11254123
Regular
Oct 28, 2019

SAMANTHA HANSEN vs. ALERE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., THE HARTFORD INSURANCE GROUP

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for a neck and spine injury. The applicant's attorney provided proof of service for the claim form on the defendant employer on March 16, 2018, and later sent a copy to the defendant insurance carrier. The defendant denied the claim on April 29, 2019, and argued that the claim should not be presumed compensable as the applicant did not prove receipt of the claim form. The Board upheld the WCJ's decision, finding that the proof of service created a presumption of receipt that the defendant failed to rebut. Therefore, the applicant's claim is presumed compensable under Labor Code Section 5402 as the defendant did not reject liability within 90 days.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code Section 5402Presumption of CompensabilityReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersPetition for ReconsiderationRN Case ManagerCumulative InjuryProof of ServiceClaim Form
References
8
Case No. ADJ11535411
Regular
Jul 19, 2019

TERRI HARRISON vs. CITY OF TORRANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, overturning a prior ruling that presumed the applicant's injury compensable due to a late denial. The Board found that the defendant's denial letter, mailed on December 26, 2018, was timely because the 90-day presumption period expired on December 25, 2018, a court holiday, making the next business day the deadline. The employer's inability to definitively prove the claim form's receipt date led the Board to infer a receipt date of September 26, 2018, thus making the December 26 denial compliant with Labor Code section 5402. Consequently, the applicant's injury is not presumed compensable.

Labor Code section 5402presumption of compensabilitytimely denialclaim form filing dateCode of Civil Procedure section 1013WCAB Rule 10507(a)court holidaybusiness day extensionPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Order
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Alvarez v. Coca-Cola Refreshments, USA, Inc.

Guillermo Nunez sued Coca-Cola Refreshments, USA, Inc. ("Coke"). Coke moved to compel arbitration of Nunez's discrimination claims, citing an arbitration program called "Solutions" and arguing that Nunez assented by continuing employment after receiving program materials. Nunez denied receiving these materials. The court, presided over by District Judge Cogan, denied Coke's motion for summary judgment on compelling arbitration. It rejected applying a "rebuttable presumption" of receipt, typically used for notice, to contract formation, finding that New York contract law requires clear and explicit agreement. The court ruled that Nunez's affidavit denying receipt created a triable issue of fact, precluding a decision as a matter of law, and ordered a trial to determine whether an agreement to arbitrate existed.

Arbitration AgreementContract FormationFederal Arbitration ActRebuttable PresumptionReceipt of MailContinued EmploymentAssent to ArbitrateDispute ResolutionSecond CircuitMotion to Compel
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. St. Barnabas Nursing Home

Plaintiff Felicia Pickett Johnson, pro se, brought an action against her former employer, St. Barnabas Nursing Home, and co-worker, Ronald Granger, under Title VII, the ADA, and New York Human Rights Laws. Claims against Granger were dismissed without prejudice. St. Barnabas moved for judgment on the pleadings, asserting that Johnson's federal claims were time-barred because she failed to file within 90 days of receiving her EEOC right-to-sue letter. The court determined that Johnson's filing on February 7, 2008, was beyond the 90-day period, whether calculated from the presumptive receipt date of November 3, 2007, or her claimed receipt date of November 14, 2007 (or even November 8, 2008, based on a fax confirmation). Finding no extraordinary circumstances to warrant equitable tolling, the court dismissed the federal claims as time-barred and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. Consequently, St. Barnabas's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted.

Title VIIADAEmployment DiscriminationStatute of LimitationsEquitable TollingRight-to-Sue LetterJudgment on the PleadingsSupplemental JurisdictionCivil Rights ActAmericans with Disabilities Act
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 793 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