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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 08, 1999

What Happened in Felix vs. Weber Metals Reconsideration?

The plaintiffs, Anderson and Hollingsworth, filed suit against defendant Conwood for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), alleging improper acquisition of their credit reports for litigation. A jury awarded each plaintiff $2,000,000 in compensatory damages and $3,500,000 in punitive damages. Conwood subsequently moved for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, or a remittitur of damages, arguing the verdict was excessive and driven by passion and prejudice. The court granted Conwood's motion for remittitur, reducing each plaintiff's compensatory award to $50,000 and entirely vacating the punitive damages award due to a lack of evidentiary foundation. The court denied Conwood's motions for a new trial and judgment as a matter of law.

Fair Credit Reporting ActFCRAPunitive DamagesCompensatory DamagesRemittiturJury VerdictExcessive DamagesDue ProcessSixth CircuitDistrict Court
References
21
Case No. ADJ7167413; ADJ7167333
Regular
Aug 04, 2016

How Did the WCAB Rule in Hardgrove vs. Intercon Security?

This case involves Rosa Lopez seeking workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained across multiple dates. The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) was initially involved, but following a Court of Appeal remittitur, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded its prior decision. The Board now finds that CIGA is not liable for outstanding lien claims and orders CIGA dismissed as a party defendant in these consolidated cases.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAOther InsuranceLien ClaimsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJ
References
0
Case No. ADJ8710988
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

What Did the WCAB Decide in Cuadra vs. Community Home Care?

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision, following a Court of Appeal remittitur, mandates a redetermination of the applicant's permanent disability rating. The Court clarified that the appropriate occupational group must be based on the physical activities of the employee's job duties, not solely on job title. Consequently, the Board reinstated its prior decision but amended Finding 5 to defer issues of occupational group and permanent disability. The case is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings to establish the correct occupational group and permanent disability.

RemittiturOccupational groupPermanent disabilityPhysical activitiesWCJPQME reportCourt of AppealReconsiderationAnnulledRemand
References
0
Case No. ADJ1371452 (FRE 0216183)
Regular
Jan 05, 2012

How Were Death Benefits Handled in Bocanegra vs. Sun-Gro Commodities?

This case returns to the WCAB following a court remittitur, directing reconsideration based on the *Baker* decision. The *Baker* ruling clarified that Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) under Labor Code section 4659(c) are applied prospectively from the January 1st following entitlement. For this applicant's total permanent disability, permanent and stationary status and benefit commencement were April 26, 2008, entitling them to the COLA from January 1, 2009. Consequently, the WCAB granted reconsideration, affirmed the original award except for substituted findings regarding the COLA start date, and deferred the attorney's fees issue for trial level determination.

RemittiturBaker v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Labor Code section 4659(c)COLAPermanent and Stationary DateTotal Permanent DisabilityLife PensionState Average Weekly WageAttorney's FeesJurisdiction Reserved
References
1
Case No. TI11710087
Regular
Nov 20, 2018

Can a WCJ Be Disqualified for Appearance of Bias?

This case involves applicant Theodore Davis's prostate cancer claim against the City of Modesto. The core dispute centers on the admissibility and review of a medical report by Dr. Besses. The Appeals Board initially denied review of Dr. Besses' report but, following a court of appeal remittitur, is now granting removal. The matter is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to re-evaluate the admissibility of Dr. Besses' report under Labor Code section 4605 and related rules, and whether it can be provided to the QME. This decision clarifies that while QME evaluations are required for compensability disputes, privately obtained medical reports may still be admissible.

RemittiturPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationQualified Medical EvaluatorLabor Code Section 4060Labor Code Section 4605Admissibility of Medical ReportsEx Parte CommunicationCumulative TraumaSpecific Injury
References
9
Case No. AHM 70712
En Banc
Jul 27, 2004

What Were the Key Rulings in Torrez vs. SuperShuttle?

The Appeals Board, following a remittitur from the Court of Appeal, rescinded a prior decision and affirmed that the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) is not obligated to pay a lien from the Employment Development Department (EDD) because it is not a 'covered claim'.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturEmployment Development DepartmentEDD lienCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAcovered claimInsurance CodeCourt of AppealWCJ
References
1
Case No. AHM 70712
Significant

Why Was Removal Denied in Rush vs. California Correctional Institution?

The Appeals Board, following a remittitur from the Court of Appeal, rescinds its 2002 decision and reinstates its 2001 decision, affirming that the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) is not obligated to pay the lien claim of the Employment Development Department (EDD).

RemittiturEn BancEmployment Development DepartmentEDD lienCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAcovered claimState of Californiarescindedreinstated
References
2
Case No. POM 248928
Significant
May 12, 2006

What Did the WCAB Clarify in Ontiveros vs. Savers Stores?

The Appeals Board, following a remittitur, determined that a special employer's insurance policy is not 'other insurance' under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9). As a result, the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) was denied dismissal from the case involving the general employer's insolvent insurer.

RemittiturEn BancDecertified OpinionInsurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9)Other InsuranceCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)Reliance National Indemnity Co.LiquidationRemedyTempInc.
References
5
Case No. POM 248928
Regular
May 12, 2006

Why Was Reconsideration Denied in Gomez vs. Dorothy Stevens?

The Court of Appeal reversed the Appeals Board's prior decision, finding that the special employer's insurance (American Home Assurance Co.) was not "other insurance" available to the applicant. This ruling invalidated the previous dismissal of CIGA and dictated that the case be returned for further proceedings. The Appeals Board, following this remittitur, rescinded the prior consolidation and stay order, denying RemedyTemp's request for dismissal and CIGA/RemedyTemp's request for a new consolidation. Assurance's petition for appeal costs was also dismissed as it was filed with the wrong entity.

CIGARemedyTempJacuzziAmerican Home Assurance Co.Reliance National Indemnity Co.special employergeneral employerother insuranceInsurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9)remittitur
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Why Was Reconsideration Dismissed in Sabino vs. Johnson Pump Company?

This appeal concerns the remittitur of a jury verdict in a vehicular accident case. The defendant driver caused substantial personal injuries to the plaintiff, Karen Johnson, leading to a jury award of compensatory damages. The trial court subsequently suggested a significant remittitur of the total verdict. Johnson accepted the remittitur under protest and appealed the decision. The appellate court reviewed the trial court's denial of a new trial and the suggested remittitur. The court affirmed the denial of a new trial, reversed the suggestion of remittitur, and reinstated the original jury verdict, finding the evidence preponderated against the trial court's reduction of damages.

Personal InjuryVehicular AccidentRemittiturJury VerdictEconomic DamagesNon-Economic DamagesLost WagesMedical ExpensesPain and SufferingPermanent Impairment
References
25
Showing 1-10 of 169 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