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. ADJ255119 (GOL 0100780) ADJ592600 (GOL 0100779)
Regular
May 09, 2014

DELFINA HUERTA vs. MOTEL 6, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for removal seeking to hold proceedings in the Oxnard district office. The WCAB cited statutory provisions allowing the Division of Workers' Compensation to determine office locations based on budget and resource availability. Furthermore, the Board has discretion to calendar hearings at alternative locations or utilize remote conferencing options like CourtCall, even if the venue is set elsewhere, to manage limited judicial and space resources. This discretion is supported by regulations that permit lien conferences and other hearings to be set without a formal change of venue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalDivision of Workers' Compensationbudgetary constraintsvenueCourtCallmedical treatment lien conferencesmandatory settlement conferencesatellite office
References
0
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05554 [242 AD3d 1279]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 09, 2025

Matter of Cho v. New York City Tr. Auth.

Claimant Henry Cho initially established a workers' compensation claim in September 2019 for chemical sensitivity. He later sought to amend this claim to include psychological conditions, such as anxiety and depression, as consequential injuries, attributing them to supervisor harassment and fear of returning to his initial work location. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and subsequently the Workers' Compensation Board disallowed the amendment. They found that Cho failed to prove a direct or natural causal relationship between his psychological injuries and his original chemical sensitivity. The Board noted that his work location accommodation had been approved, and any alleged harassment was too remote to establish a causal nexus to the prior disability, even if it could constitute a separate claim for work-related stress. The Board's decision to deny the amendment was affirmed, being supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' Compensation BoardCausal RelationConsequential DisabilityPsychological ConditionChemical SensitivityExpert OpinionsSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewWorkplace HarassmentMedical Evidence
References
9
Case No. ADJ9166662
Regular
Apr 04, 2014

EDITH BARRETT vs. PACIFICA GRADUATE INSTITUTE, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's petition for removal. The WCAB affirmed the administrative law judge's report, which found no irreparable harm from rescheduling a conference to the Oxnard office due to space limitations at the Santa Barbara satellite office. The WCAB reiterated its authority to calendar hearings at different locations based on available resources and noted that CourtCall is available for remote appearances. The applicant's attorney failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or substantial harm resulting from the venue change.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDivision of Workers' CompensationVenueDistrict OfficeHearing LocationBudgetary ConstraintsJudicial ResourcesSpace ResourcesCourtCall
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 08, 1972

Claim of Marciniak v. Berlitz School of Languages

The claimant, a French teacher, was injured on his way home after teaching a class at an alternate location (Hospital for Special Surgery) following his regular shift at the employer's main school. The Workmen’s Compensation Board denied his claim, but the court reversed this decision. The court reasoned that the claimant, when traveling to and from the remote teaching assignment, was acting as an 'outside worker.' Citing established precedents, the court concluded that the homeward journey from such a special work assignment falls within the course of employment. Therefore, the Board's decision was reversed, and the case was sent back for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.

Worker's CompensationOutside EmployeeCourse of EmploymentTravel InjuryDual Employment LocationAppealRemittalSpecial Errand RuleWork-Related Injury
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2004

Claim of Shanbaum v. Alliance Consulting Group

The claimant, a software solution architect for Alliance Consulting Group, sustained an injury on September 11, 2001, while evacuating her apartment located across from her employer's World Trade Center office after the terrorist attacks. Her employer provided and paid for the apartment, which also served as a remote workspace equipped with a company laptop for accessing the main server. On the morning of the incident, the claimant had logged onto her computer, checked work emails, and begun preparing for a meeting. The Workers’ Compensation Board determined that the apartment functioned as an extension of the employer’s office and that the injury arose within the scope of her employment. This decision was subsequently affirmed on appeal.

Workers' CompensationScope of EmploymentAccidental InjuryTelecommutingHome OfficeWorld Trade Center AttacksSeptember 11Employer LiabilityArising Out Of EmploymentCourse Of Employment
References
2
Case No. ADJ7735518 ADJ7735519 ADJ7735513 ADJ7735501 ADJ7735502 ADJ7736429 ADJ7736449 ADJ7735498 ADJ7098593 ADJ7735514
Regular
Jul 29, 2014

Marialaine Tabak vs. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration regarding a dispute over medical treatment authorization. The core issue was whether a Medical Provider Network (MPN) could restrict treatment to specific office locations of a listed physician. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the defendant school district properly denied authorization for treatment at an unauthorized location of an MPN physician. The MPN's explicit listing stated providers were in-network only at designated locations, and this contractual limitation was upheld. Therefore, treatment outside the approved location was at the applicant's own expense.

Medical Provider NetworkMPNPhysician locationAuthorizationSelf-procureGeographic limitExclusive rightContractual limitationsEmployer's obligationAdministrative Director's Rule
References
2
Case No. ADJ2124401
Regular
Apr 09, 2014

THOMAS ENGLE vs. COPY RIGHT PRINTING SYSTEMS, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal regarding a change of hearing location from Santa Barbara to Oxnard. The Board reasoned that the Division of Workers' Compensation has budgetary constraints and the inherent power to manage its calendars, including changing hearing locations due to space limitations at the Santa Barbara satellite office. The Board noted that CourtCall and other options exist for participants who have difficulty traveling to Oxnard.

RemovalPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCABDivision of Workers' CompensationDWCVenueDistrict OfficeSatellite OfficeCourtCall
References
1
Case No. ADJ2432526 (MON 0226419)
Regular
May 07, 2012

PATRICIA MANDEL vs. MEDIA SERVICES, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

This case concerns CIGA's challenge to a WCJ's order allowing an applicant, who relocated to Connecticut, to testify via remote deposition regarding out-of-pocket expenses for an admitted industrial injury. CIGA argued this would cause prejudice and irreparable harm. The Appeals Board denied CIGA's petition for removal, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that remote depositions are permissible under California law. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to proceed with the applicant's deposition and consider cost reimbursement.

CIGAPetition for RemovalOff CalendarOut-of-State DepositionLabor Code § 5811Agreed Medical EvaluatorKnee ReplacementIndustrial InjuryRemote Electronic MeansCalifornia Code of Civil Procedure § 2025.310
References
0
Case No. ADJ10053885
Regular
Dec 24, 2015

MARK NEVITT vs. PARAMOUNT PAINTING, MARKEL SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for removal, overturning an order denying a change of venue. The WCAB found that venue was proper in Santa Barbara because the applicant resides and his attorney's principal place of business is located there. The Board determined that the Santa Barbara office provides the same essential services as other district offices, making it a valid location for venue under Labor Code section 5501.5. Consequently, the case venue was transferred to the Santa Barbara District Office.

Petition for RemovalOrder Denying Change of VenueLabor Code Section 5501.5VenueDistrict OfficeSanta Barbara District OfficeSan Luis Obispo District OfficeApplicant's ResidencePlace of InjuryAttorney's Principal Place of Business
References
3
Case No. ADJ9674694
Regular
Feb 02, 2016

RAMONDA WALKER vs. PETROCHEM INSULATION, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns whether the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has jurisdiction over an applicant's claim for an injury sustained while working in Utah. The applicant, hired by a California-based company, argues California has jurisdiction because the company is based there, he paid California taxes, and he was directed to join a California union. However, the WCAB affirmed the finding that it lacked jurisdiction, as the applicant was hired and injured outside of California. The Board held that the location of the hiring and the injury are determinative for jurisdiction, not the employer's location or the applicant's tax payments.

JurisdictionContract of HireLabor Code § 5305Labor Code § 3600.5(a)WCABIndustrial InjuryPetrochem InsulationInc.Ramonada WalkerReconsideration
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 311 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