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. ADJ3792740 (OAK 0325116)
Regular
Dec 12, 2008

BONNIE REDDRICK vs. TENET/DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER

This case concerns an award of appellate costs to the applicant's attorney. The Court of Appeal remanded the matter for the determination of these costs following the denial of the defendant's petition for review. The Appeals Board awarded $152.21 in costs, representing verifiable delivery expenses, as in-house copying, mailing, and labor costs are considered overhead and not recoverable.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Writ of ReviewAppellate CostsLabor Code § 5811Johnson v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Supreme Court of CaliforniaItemized CostsDelivery CostsMailing CostsCopying Costs
References
Case No. ADJ2151993 (SFO 0507276)
Regular
May 18, 2018

RICHARD JOHNSON vs. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CITY OF PACIFICA

This case concerns the award of appellate costs to the City of Pacifica. The Court of Appeal previously affirmed a decision in Pacifica's favor and ordered the City of South San Francisco (CSSF) to bear Pacifica's costs. Pacifica subsequently submitted a verified petition for costs totaling $1,425.00, which included electronic filing and paper copy expenses. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found Pacifica's requested costs reasonable and awarded them against CSSF.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturFirst District Court of AppealPetition for ReconsiderationArbitratorPetition for CostsAppellate CostsReimbursementVerified PetitionSubstantiation of Costs
References
Case No. FRE 0191303
Regular
Nov 27, 2007

NORMA OZUNA vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a finding that the defendant was not responsible for the costs of the applicant's vocational expert. The WCAB remanded the case to the trial level for further analysis, instructing the judge to consider the factors outlined in *Costa v. Hardy Diagnostic* regarding the reasonableness and necessity of expert costs. The decision does not comment on the merits of whether the costs are ultimately reimbursable.

Vocational expert costsLabor Code section 5811Costa v. Hardy DiagnosticPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleAppeals Board en banccumulative traumaHepatitis Ccorrectional officeragreed medical evaluatorfindings of fact and award
References
Case No. ADJ2185374 (LAO 0844306)
Regular
May 15, 2014

JOHN DEL PINTO vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed an arbitrator's decision regarding reimbursement between two cities for medical treatment costs. The arbitrator awarded the City of Glendale 50% reimbursement from the City of Los Angeles for medical payments made. However, the arbitrator denied Glendale reimbursement for cost-containment expenses like bill review and utilization review. Glendale's petition for reconsideration, arguing for full apportionment recovery and reimbursement of cost-containment costs, was denied. The Appeals Board adopted the arbitrator's reasoning, affirming the original award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardLien ClaimantReimbursementApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorMedical Bill ReviewUtilization ReviewCost-Containment Expenses
References
Case No. ADJ4640837 (GRO 0031810)
Regular
Jan 05, 2009

JOEY M. COSTA vs. HARDY DIAGNOSTIC, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ’s decision and allowed the costs of Ms. Wallace’s report and testimony, finding that inadmissibility is not a basis for disallowing reimbursement and that the standards for reimbursement were met.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleReconsiderationVocational Rehabilitation ExpertRebuttal EvidenceLabor Code Section 5811Reasonable and Necessary CostsAdmissibilitySettlement NegotiationsBarr v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ9613492
Regular
Sep 05, 2025

BRIGITTE PAIGE vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

Brigitte Paige, an office assistant, sustained injuries to her lumbar spine, hip, and psyche in 2014 while employed by the County of Riverside. San Diego Imaging, Inc., doing business as California Imaging Solutions, sought reimbursement for medical-legal services which the Workers' Compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) denied in Findings and Orders (F&O) on December 21, 2020. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and found that the defendant's objection to an earlier Order Allowing Costs was untimely, making that order effective on April 2, 2019. Consequently, the Board rescinded the WCJ's F&O, substituted a new F&O finding the defendant liable for payment based on the April 2, 2019 order, and deferred the issue of costs and sanctions to the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and OrdersCost PetitionerMedical-Legal ServicesSubpoena Duces TecumCompromise and ReleaseStipulations with Request for AwardOrder Allowing CostsTimeliness of Objection
References
Case No. ADJ1643143 (SRO 0122410)
Regular
May 25, 2010

JUAN ESCUTIA vs. NICK LERAS WATER TRUCKS, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision holding the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) liable for reimbursement to the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA). CIGA, adjusting claims for an insolvent insurer, sought reimbursement for various administrative expenses, including bill review, court reporter fees, and opposing counsel fees incurred while administering an injured worker's claim. The Board found these costs, particularly bill review expenses, were part of "incurred losses" under the California Workers' Compensation Uniform Statistical Reporting Plan and thus reimbursable. This decision establishes that CIGA can recover such administrative costs from a solvent insurer when adjusting claims for an insolvent carrier.

CIGASCIFBill ReviewIncurred LossesLoss Adjustment ExpensesInsurance Code Section 1063.1(c)(9)Labor Code Section 5500.5(e)California Workers' Compensation Uniform Statistical Reporting PlanReconsiderationFindings and Orders
References
Case No. ADJ4571225 (RDG 0049527)
Regular
Oct 20, 2016

KENNETH TORRES vs. DIVE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, LIBERTY MUTUAL

The applicant sought reimbursement for increased utility costs associated with an electric spa tub used for an industrial injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision, finding the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof regarding the necessity and quantification of these costs. The Board adopted the judge's reasoning, concluding no further development of the record was warranted. Therefore, the original award denying reimbursement for increased utility bills was upheld.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and Orderutility billselectric spa tubindustrial injurylow backpsycheenergy costsfurther development of the record
References
Case No. ADJ4399114 (POM 0281905) MF
Regular
Jun 27, 2013

RICARDO GARCIA vs. AMERICAN STAFF RESOURCES OF CALIFORNIA/TRIMCO, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for CASCADE INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB ordered SCIF to reimburse the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) $27,082.67 for costs incurred in a workers' compensation claim previously settled by SCIF. SCIF argued CIGA failed to prove reasonableness of costs and timely tendered the claim. The WCAB denied SCIF's petition, affirming the prior award, finding CIGA's expenditures were reasonable and necessary given SCIF's stipulation to the amounts spent and lack of evidence to the contrary. The Board clarified CIGA's legal status but upheld the reimbursement order based on statutory obligations and public policy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardState Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAreimbursementreasonable costsnecessary expenditurecompromise and releaseinvoluntary association of insurersstatutory duties
References
Case No. ADJ7646278
Regular
May 25, 2012

KIRK ALVARADO vs. ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

Former applicant's counsel sought reconsideration of an arbitrator's order requiring them to pay $525.00 to reimburse the defendant for a failed deposition. The arbitrator based the order on a "fair balance" rather than bad faith, believing the defense was ready to proceed. However, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the cost order. The Board found that miscommunication between the applicant and his attorney, not counsel's fault, caused the deposition's failure.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFailed DepositionReimbursement of CostsLabor Code Section 5811MiscommunicationApplicant's CounselDefense CounselAward of Costs
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,188 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