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. ADJ7341449
Regular
Oct 01, 2012

CINTHIA QUINTANILLA vs. RITE AID, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Cinthia Quintanilla's petition for reconsideration in the case against Rite Aid and Travelers Property Casualty Company. The WCAB adopted the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) and gave them great weight, particularly regarding credibility. This order upholds the WCJ's original decision without further elaboration.

QuintanillaRite AidTravelers Property Casualty CompanyADJ7341449Reconsideration DeniedWCJ ReportCredibility FindingGarza v. WCABWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge
References
1
Case No. ADJ8710457
Regular
Jul 25, 2016

AMANDA QUINTANILLA vs. SUN HEALTHCARE GROUP dba PROCARE ONE, NATIONAL UNION INSURANCE

This case involves an applicant, Amanda Quintanilla, seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board has granted reconsideration to allow further study of the factual and legal issues. This action is being taken to ensure a thorough understanding of the record and to enable a just decision. All future correspondence related to the petition must be filed directly with the Appeals Board Commissioners, not with district offices or through EAMS.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionFurther ProceedingsOffice of the CommissionersSan FranciscoElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)
References
0
Case No. ADJ7200789
Regular
Nov 08, 2012

ERASMO QUINTANILLA AVILES vs. PACER INTERNATIONAL, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY administered by CHARTIS CLAIMS, INC.

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim where the applicant, Erasmo Quintanilla Aviles, sought benefits for industrial injuries. The defendant, Pacer International, challenged the finding that the applicant was an employee, arguing lack of persuasive control and misinterpretation of their contract. The applicant also contested the findings regarding the specific body parts injured. After granting reconsideration, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the original decision in its entirety. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, denying the defendant's petition and upholding the finding of industrial injury and employee status.

Independent ContractorPersuasive ControlFindings & AwardReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryBurden of ProofWCJContract InterpretationPacer International
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rivera v. Harvest Bakery Inc.

This case involves allegations by plaintiffs Maximino Rivera, Miguel Roldan, and Oscar Quintanilla against Harvest Bakery, Inc., Robert Marconti, and Jose Gonzalez. The plaintiffs claim the defendants failed to pay overtime and spread of hours wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL). The core of the dispute revolves around whether the defendants had a common policy of not paying these wages to their production workers. The Court addresses the defendants' arguments regarding the prematurity and mootness of the plaintiffs' motion for class certification, ultimately rejecting them. The Court then proceeds to grant the plaintiffs' motion, certifying a class of current and former non-exempt hourly employees who worked for Harvest Bakery in New York, and appoints class counsel, finding that the requirements of Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) (numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy of representation, predominance, and superiority) have been met.

Wage and Hour LawOvertime PaySpread of Hours WagesClass Action CertificationRule 23(b)(3)FLSA ViolationNYLL ViolationCommonalityTypicalityNumerosity
References
55
Case No. ADJ10549266
Regular
Jan 18, 2018

VICTOR QUINTANILLA (DEC'D), HEIDI QUINTANILLA vs. PRONTO EXPRESS & SERVICES, INC., ISHMAEL PATEL, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

In this workers' compensation death benefit claim, the defendant employer sought reconsideration of a finding that the decedent sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The appeals board affirmed the decision, primarily because the employer failed to timely deny the claim within the 90-day statutory period. This untimely denial created a rebuttable presumption of compensability under Labor Code section 5402(b). The defendant's argument regarding the "going and coming" rule became moot as they failed to raise any objection to the timeliness of the denial in their petition. Therefore, the original findings and award of death benefits were affirmed.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationInjury Arising Out Of and In the Course Of Employment (AOE/COE)Going and Coming RuleLabor Code Section 5402(b)Presumption of CompensabilityUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundTimely DenialRebuttal of PresumptionReasonable Diligence
References
6
Case No. ADJ8032723
Regular
Nov 15, 2016

ALBA QUINTANILLA vs. TARGET CORPORATION, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing their lien for failure to appear at a conference. The Board denied the petition because the lien claimant did not provide a verified declaration from their representative explaining the alleged miscalendaring. Furthermore, the Board found that the lien claimant failed to properly serve the representative with the dismissal order. Consequently, the lien claimant's grounds for relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) were not met.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantDismissal of LienNotice of Intention to DismissLien ConferenceFailure to AppearMistakeInadvertenceExcusable Neglect
References
1
Case No. AHM 0132646
Regular
May 29, 2008

RAY QUINTANILLA vs. VOLT SERVICE, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

This case denied an applicant's petition for reconsideration regarding his right shoulder injury claim. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that surgery was not currently required, prioritizing the Agreed Medical Evaluator's opinion over the primary treating physician's. The Board found the applicant's new evidence of photographs insufficient to outweigh the AME's comprehensive analysis.

Agreed Medical EvaluatorSub Rosa VideoWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings of FactReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryShoulder SurgeryMedical OpinionSubstantial EvidenceMedical History
References
8
Case No. ADJ9615369, ADJ9615370, ADJ10928806
Regular
Jun 19, 2018

CATALINA REYES QUINTANILLA vs. TARZANA FIVE-FOUR CORNERS INVESTMENT, PUBLIC SERVICE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CORVEL CORPORATION

This case concerns Defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order approving a $50,000 settlement for Applicant's workers' compensation claims. Defendant argued the order incorrectly failed to credit $5,913.87 in permanent disability advances paid to Applicant. However, the Compromise and Release agreement clearly indicated zero permanent disability advances and explicitly settled that issue. The Appeals Board found no evidence of mutual mistake and denied reconsideration, ruling that Defendant's failure to ensure the credit was included in the agreement constituted a unilateral mistake due to their own neglect.

Compromise and ReleasePermanent Disability AdvancesPetition for ReconsiderationOrder ApprovingWCJUnilateral MistakeMutual MistakeNeglect of Legal DutyContract InterpretationWaiver of Reimbursement
References
8
Showing 1-8 of 8 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