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. ADJ9772556, ADJ9772554
Regular
Dec 04, 2017

JOHNNY MORAGA vs. CHAFFEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE, YORK INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Johnny Moraga's successive petition for reconsideration as it was filed after a prior petition for the same matter was already denied. The Board also addressed a supplemental pleading, reminding the applicant of filing rules. Moraga's prior claims were dismissed without prejudice, meaning he would need to file a new application to re-initiate them. Allegations of attorney misconduct and a worsened injury may require separate legal avenues, as they fall outside the Board's jurisdiction.

Petition for ReconsiderationSuccessive PetitionDismissed Without PrejudicePetition to Change VenueOfficial Address RecordNew Aggrieved PartyPetition for Writ of ReviewRe-initiate ClaimApplication for Adjudication of ClaimStatute of Limitations
References
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. GRO 27301, GRO 28637
Regular
Feb 11, 2008

HERMAN DENNLER vs. TIMEC CO., INC., ST. PAUL TRAVELERS, OPEN WAVES SYSTEMS, LUMBERMAN'S MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board opinion corrects a clerical error in a previous decision, specifically removing the incorrect statement that St. Paul Travelers was adjusted by Broadspire. The case involves two injuries sustained by Herman Dennler in 2002, with awards of permanent disability indemnity and future medical treatment granted against Timec Co., Inc. (insured by St. Paul Travelers) and Open Wave Systems (insured by Lumberman's Mutual Casualty Company). The correction clarifies that St. Paul Travelers was the insurance carrier for Timec Co., Inc. and was not adjusted by Broadspire.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardclerical errorreconsiderationaward correctionpermanent partial disabilitytemporary disability indemnitymedical treatmentattorney's feeslienTimec Co.
References
Case No. ADJ7688956
Regular
Jan 31, 2012

SHARON FRINK vs. SHASTA-TEHAMA-TRINITY JOINT COMMUNITY COLLEGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded prior orders, and returned the case for further proceedings. The issue was whether the applicant must attend a re-evaluation with the same Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) after he moved his office a short distance. The Board found that Labor Code section 4062.3(j) requires parties to utilize the same QME for subsequent disputes if possible. They clarified that Administrative Director Rule 34(b) regarding the QME's office location applies only to initial evaluations, not re-evaluations. Therefore, the applicant's refusal to travel a short distance for re-evaluation was not grounds for a new panel QME.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalQualified Medical Examiner (QME)Re-evaluationLabor Code Section 4062.3(j)Administrative Director Rule 34(b)Administrative Director Rule 36(d)Medical Office LocationUnavailable QMECompel Attendance
References
Case No. ADJ3004293
Regular
May 15, 2009

JOHN M. WILLIAMS vs. RE-BUILDERS, INC., dba RE-BUILDERS NORTH BAY and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, LABOR CONNECTION, INC., CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES GROUP, INC., CIGA for RELIANCE INSURANCE

This case concerns CIGA's liability for an applicant's workers' compensation benefits after the general employer's insurer became insolvent. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) overturned a prior finding, ruling that the special employer's SCIF policy constituted "other insurance." Therefore, under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9)(A), CIGA is relieved of liability. The matter was returned for determination of reimbursement between CIGA and SCIF.

CIGASCIFgeneral employerspecial employerLabor ConnectionRe-BuildersInc.Reliance Insuranceother insuranceInsurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9)(A)
References
Case No. ADJ3166754
Regular
Nov 30, 2015

STEVE HAYDN vs. SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES

In this case, the defendant sought reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision regarding applicant's chosen Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The Board granted reconsideration to defer issues of attorney's fees and penalties, while affirming the award of $3,937.50 for the QME's medical-legal reports. The Board found the applicant correctly followed pre-2005 QME selection procedures and that service on the defendant's adjuster, not counsel, did not prejudice the defendant. The matter was returned to the trial level to further develop the record concerning penalties and attorney fees.

Qualified Medical EvaluatorUtilization ReviewAgreed Medical ExaminerLabor Code Section 4062Medical-Legal ReportsAttorney FeesPenaltiesInterestPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ10343251, ADJ10713340, ADJ10713342
Regular
Apr 27, 2023

JOSE CORTES vs. ST. JOHN'S REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision that awarded temporary disability benefits to Jose Cortes. The employer petitioned for reconsideration, seeking credit for alleged temporary disability payments previously made in one claim against an award in a related cumulative trauma claim. However, the Board found the employer waived this issue by failing to raise it in pre-trial statements and by not presenting evidence of the payments. The Board also noted that the employer specifically raised the issue of credit for permanent disability advances, suggesting they omitted the temporary disability credit intentionally.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONDENYINGADJUDICATION NUMBERSSTIPULATIONS WITH REQUEST FOR AWARDRE-OPENAPPLICATIONS FOR ADJUDICATIONINJURY ARISING OUT OF AND OCCURRING IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENTEXCESSIVE AND REPETITIVE USEJOINT FINDINGS AWARD AND ORDERS
References
Case No. ADJ9843524
Regular
Dec 13, 2017

THEODORE MEREDITH vs. SWIFT TRANSPORTATION, ESIS, administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Theodore Meredith's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed significantly past the jurisdictional 25-day deadline following service of the WCJ's order. Despite the dismissal, the Board noted the petition might indicate a desire to re-initiate the claim. They returned the matter to the trial level for the WCJ to determine if the petition effectively sought to re-initiate the claim, subject to statute of limitations. The WCJ will develop the record and applicant may file a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed.

Petition for Reconsiderationuntimelyjurisdictionaldismissedstatute of limitationsLabor CodeCal. Code Regs.Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJre-initiate claim
References
Case No. ADJ4641554 (SAL 082653)
Regular
Sep 04, 2014

SUSAN LOCEY (deceased), DIRK LOCEY (husband) vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION

This case involves a petition for reconsideration of decisions regarding an injured correctional officer, Susan Locey. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the administrative law judge's (WCJ) findings, remanding the case for further development of the record. While the WCAB upheld the finding of total permanent disability accrued before the employee's death, it found insufficient evidence for an additional temporary disability period and a need for further proceedings to apply Labor Code section 4700 regarding dependents. The WCAB also confirmed that any future temporary disability indemnity must be adjusted per section 4661.5.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSusan LoceyDirk LoceyState of California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitationlegally uninsuredOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationstipulated awardindustrial injurycorrectional officertemporary disability
References
Case No. ADJ2670962 (VNO 0452832)
Regular
Feb 16, 2018

Willie Atkins vs. Anheuser-Busch; permissibly self-insured, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, rescinding the WCJ's order taking the matter off calendar. The applicant alleged discrimination and sought to proceed with his Labor Code section 132(a) petition, which had been deemed untimely. The Board found that substantial prejudice would result from denying removal, as a hearing was necessary to determine the timeliness of the 132(a) claim and admit evidence. The applicant's separate petition to disqualify the WCJ was dismissed due to procedural deficiencies and lack of factual support for bias.

Petition for RemovalLabor Code Section 132(a)WCJVexatious LitigantDisqualificationOff CalendarSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationIn Propria Persona
References
Showing 1-10 of 372 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