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. ADJ2393396 (VNO 0518987) ADJ1912573 (VNO 0518986)
Regular
May 05, 2015

CHRISTOPHER COLON vs. MILES CHEMICAL COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a workers' compensation claim where the applicant alleged serious and willful misconduct by his employer, Miles Chemical Company. The applicant claimed the employer failed to provide adequate safety equipment, specifically respiratory filters, leading to injuries from chemical exposure. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the trial judge's finding that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct. The Board found the applicant's injuries were caused by third-party forklift drivers and lacked sufficient evidence that the alleged inadequate respiratory filters were the proximate cause of the injury or that the employer acted with the requisite intent or recklessness.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and willful misconductLabor Code section 4553Industrial injuryChemical exposureRespiratory filtersNegligenceProximate causeSubstantial evidenceManaging officer
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lewis v. Cambridge Filter Corp.

Claimant allegedly injured her back while working for Cambridge Filter Corporation in June 1982. She filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, which was initially disallowed by an Administrative Law Judge. The Workers’ Compensation Board later reversed this decision, relying primarily on the claimant’s testimony. However, the Appellate Division reversed the Board's determination, concluding it lacked substantial evidence. The court highlighted significant inconsistencies in the claimant's account compared to unimpeached testimony from impartial witnesses and supporting documentary evidence regarding the injury report and medical history, remitting the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryCredibilitySubstantial EvidenceALJ ReversalBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewMedical TestimonyWitness TestimonyControverted Claim
References
4
Case No. ADJ1488656 (LBO 0306208) ADJ4190554 (LBO 0365076) ADJ4297163 (LBO 0302764) ADJ4306223 (LBO 0322527)
Regular
Jan 12, 2010

CHARLIE A. WOOTEN (CHARLINE ANN WOOTEN) vs. BARLOW RESPIRATORY HOSPITAL, INTERCARE PASADENA, ZENITH

This case involves multiple consolidated claims by applicant Charlie A. Wooten against Barlow Respiratory Hospital and others. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of the prior judge's decision. The WCAB rescinded that decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ. This action is not a final determination of the merits, and parties retain their rights to further reconsideration.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRECONSIDERATIONADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGEWCJRESCINDEDFURTHER PROCEEDINGSDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONTRIAL LEVELPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONBARLOW RESPIRATORY HOSPITAL
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Goding v. Par Microsystems

This case involves a claimant's appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied benefits for a respiratory condition. The claimant alleged the condition was an occupational disease caused by workplace irritants. The Board's decision, which found no causal relationship between the condition and employment, was based on the opinion of a pulmonologist. This expert concluded that the claimant's respiratory distress was related to obesity, not occupational asthma or multiple chemical sensitivities. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that the Board has the discretion to resolve conflicts in medical opinions, particularly when determining causality.

Occupational DiseaseRespiratory ConditionCausationMedical Opinion ConflictWorkers' Compensation BenefitsIndependent Medical ExaminationBoard DiscretionAsthmaMultiple Chemical SensitivitiesObesity
References
4
Case No. ADJ4177198
Regular
Jul 09, 2009

JESUS HERNANDEZ vs. WARNER BROS. STUDIOS.

This case involves an applicant, Jesus Hernandez, who claims industrial injuries to his back, lower extremities, psyche, and respiratory system while employed by Warner Bros. Studios. The employer sought reconsideration of a prior order, arguing the claims were barred by the post-termination defense under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify that the applicant's claimed respiratory system injury is not barred by the post-termination defense. The Board affirmed the prior order, finding that evidence of these injuries existed in pre-termination medical records.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)post-termination defenseindustrial injuriesjanitorback injurylower extremitiespsyche injuryrespiratory system injuryinternal systems
References
0
Case No. ADJ9414071 ADJ10133403
Regular
Aug 13, 2018

Kevin McCoy vs. State of California - Pleasant Valley State Prison

This case involves an appeal regarding the permanent disability ratings for a correctional officer's right ankle and respiratory system (Valley Fever) injuries. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the case to the WCJ for further proceedings. The Board found that the Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) ankle impairment rating was properly calculated, but the Qualified Medical Examiner's (QME) report on the respiratory injury did not sufficiently explain its deviation from strict AMA Guides application. The Board emphasized that medical evaluators must adhere to the AMA Guides or clearly justify any deviations to ensure substantial evidence.

WCABPleasant Valley State Prisonlegally uninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundKevin McCoyADJ9414071ADJ10133403permanent disabilityright anklerespiratory system
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jex v. Albion Correctional Facility

A vocational cosmetology instructor, the claimant, sustained a workplace injury in 1994, exacerbating preexisting respiratory issues, and received workers' compensation benefits until October 1995. In 1999, before taking disability retirement, she filed a new claim for an occupational disease caused by workplace air quality dating back to 1989. The Workers’ Compensation Board deemed her occupational disease claim time-barred under Workers’ Compensation Law § 28, a decision upheld after her application for reconsideration was denied. The court affirmed the Board's finding, stating that occupational disease claims must be filed within two years of disablement and awareness of its work-related cause. Evidence from October and December 1995 indicated the claimant's knowledge of the link between her respiratory problems and employment, thus rendering her 1999 claim untimely.

Occupational diseaseUntimely claimTime-barredRespiratory problemsVocational cosmetology instructorWorkers’ Compensation BoardAppealEvidence of knowledgeDisablement dateWorkplace injury
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Randall v. Time Warner Cable, Inc.

Plaintiff, an employee, was injured after falling from a ladder while performing cable installation work. The incident occurred during the replacement of an outdoor cable filter, which was part of a larger service upgrade involving significant interior structural alterations. Plaintiff initiated an action alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6). The Supreme Court denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and granted defendant's cross-motion, dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the court determined that the filter replacement was an integral and ancillary part of the overall alteration project, thereby falling under the protections of Labor Law § 240 (1). Consequently, the appellate court reversed the Supreme Court's decision, granting plaintiff partial summary judgment on liability for the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action.

Ladder AccidentLabor Law Section 240(1)Workplace SafetyStructural AlterationAncillary WorkSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewPersonal InjuryCable InstallationStatutory Interpretation
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Fonda v. Cambridge Filter Corp.

A claimant developed asbestosis from pre-1972 work-related asbestos exposure, diagnosed in 1991. Although the asbestosis did not cause pulmonary disability, the claimant developed a disabling panic or anxiety disorder due to the increased cancer risk. The Workers' Compensation Board denied benefits, ruling that pre-1974 asbestosis without total disability is non-compensable and a consequential anxiety disorder does not constitute an accident or occupational disease. The appellate court found that entitlement to compensation depends on whether the claimant was totally disabled by two inseparable causative agents, one of which was the asbestosis, especially since the Board had implied a causal link between asbestosis and the anxiety disorder. Because the Board failed to determine the extent of the claimant’s disability or the inseparability of the conditions, the decision was reversed and the matter remitted for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationAsbestosisOccupational DiseaseAnxiety DisorderPanic DisorderCausationTotal DisabilityCompensabilityAppellate ReviewRemand
References
3
Case No. ADJ8755824
Regular
Oct 27, 2014

ARVIN DORILLO vs. BARLOW RESPIRATORY HOSPITAL, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Arvin Dorillo, whose workers' compensation claim was dismissed by the WCJ for failing to appear at two hearings. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the dismissal. They reasoned that the applicant was not in violation of dismissal rules as he was represented by counsel at the hearings. The Board emphasized the policy of disposing of cases on their merits and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The applicant was cautioned that he must appear in person at future hearings unless he obtains new counsel.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseNotice of Intention to DismissMandatory Settlement ConferenceRelief as CounselSubstantial JusticeDisposition on MeritsRepresented by AttorneyFailure to AppearRescind Order
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 92 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