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. ADJ9876999, ADJ9876980
Regular
Jul 20, 2016

ROLANDO RENTERIA vs. CITY OF DOWNEY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of Downey's petition for reconsideration. The Board upheld the finding that police officer Rolando Renteria sustained a compensable injury to his right thumb while weightlifting at home. This was because the WCJ found the off-duty exercise to be a reasonable expectancy of employment, citing Renteria's role as a breacher on the entry team and participation in strength-based training and fitness tests. The Board deferred to the WCJ's credibility findings regarding Renteria's belief that his employer expected such fitness maintenance.

Rolando RenteriaCity of DowneyADJ9876999ADJ9876980Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderAOE/COEright thumb injuryoff-duty weightliftingLabor Code section 3600(a)(9)
References
2
Case No. ADJ13900666
Regular
Aug 01, 2025

German Renteria Pina vs. Miguel Diaz dba Brother Landscape, Da Vinci Schools

German Renteria Pina, the applicant, sustained a specific injury while employed by Miguel Diaz dba Brother Landscape, an uninsured entity. Da Vinci Schools, a permissibly self-insured entity, was also named as a defendant. The Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF) petitioned for reconsideration of a WCJ's finding that Pina was an employee of Diaz and not Da Vinci, arguing errors in employment burden of proof and insufficient evidence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the prior Findings of Fact and Order, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. This decision was made because the record was deemed incomplete to adequately determine Diaz's independent contractor status or the applicability of licensing requirements.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundMiguel Diaz dba Brother LandscapeDa Vinci SchoolsAdjudication NumberPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderWCJBurden of ProofUltimate Hirer
References
28
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 02208 [193 AD3d 1216]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 08, 2021

Matter of Canela (Sky Chefs, Inc.)

Rolando Canela, a caterer, sustained a work-related back injury in May 2018. He was awarded temporary partial disability benefits, but the employer and its carrier (appellants) challenged the Workers' Compensation Board's finding that he maintained attachment to the labor market. Appellants argued Canela refused a light-duty offer and had an inadequate independent job search. The Board, however, found no specific light-duty offer and deemed his job search, involving about two dozen online applications, sufficiently diligent. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported its determination that Canela did not reject a suitable work offer and demonstrated an attachment to the labor market.

Workers' CompensationLabor Market AttachmentLight-Duty WorkVoluntary WithdrawalSubstantial EvidenceJob SearchDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewThird DepartmentEmployer Liability
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Renteria v. Santino's Café

Claimant, a chef, suffered a work-related back injury. Five months later, while in Florida, his pain worsened, leading to an emergency room visit where a report noted he 'twisted his back again.' His employer and its carrier argued this constituted a new, unrelated injury and that the claimant had voluntarily withdrawn from the labor market. However, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board determined there was no new accident and that the claimant remained attached to the workforce. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence to support the claimant's job search efforts within medical restrictions and that the worsened pain was an exacerbation of an existing injury.

Back InjuryVoluntary Withdrawal from Labor MarketJob SearchExacerbation of InjuryMedical Report DiscrepancyWitness CredibilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewClaimant TestimonyEmployer Liability
References
4
Case No. ADJ6750243
Regular
Aug 10, 2012

ROLANDO FIGUEREDO vs. COMET ELECTRIC, TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior finding of industrial injury to the applicant's feet. The Board found the defendant's petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service of the original order. Ultimately, the Board concluded there was insufficient medical evidence to establish industrial injury to the applicant's feet. The prior finding of injury to the applicant's left thumb was otherwise affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRoland FigueredoComet ElectricTravelersFindings and OrderReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryLeft ThumbBilateral FeetElectrician
References
0
Case No. ADJ18157692
Regular
Oct 22, 2025

ROLANDO GARCIA vs. HOLLENBECK PALMS, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

Applicant filed a petition for removal from an order taking the matter off calendar, contending that the issue of striking the qualified medical evaluator (QME) was ripe for adjudication. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal, finding that the WCJ's order violated due process by being issued without creating a record or explaining the need for further development. As a decision after removal, the WCAB rescinded the August 12, 2025 order and returned the matter to the trial level to create a proper record, emphasizing the due process rights of all parties, including the QME, in such proceedings.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Striking QMEAdmissibility of ReportsLabor Code Section 4628Due ProcessIrreparable HarmSubstantial PrejudiceMedical-Legal ExpensesPhysician's Liability
References
26
Case No. ADJ7192030
Regular
Oct 04, 2010

Rolando Lemus vs. TWENTY FOUR SEVEN SECURITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding the administrative law judge's order continuing a hearing was procedural, not final. The Board also denied the applicant's petition for removal, ruling he failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from the three-week continuance. The applicant's refusal to agree to a rescheduled date and their counsel's verification issues further supported the Board's decision. Ultimately, the Board sought to expedite the case by remanding it for a prompt priority conference.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRolando LemusTwenty Four Seven Securitypetition for reconsiderationpetition for removalcontinuancepriority conferenceadministrative law judgesubstantial prejudiceirreparable harm
References
5
Case No. ADJ7263890
Regular
Apr 25, 2013

JOSETTE RENTERIA vs. BLYTHE NURSING CARE, MIDWEST INSURANCE

This case involves a lien claimant, Pharmafinance, seeking reconsideration after its lien was dismissed by the WCJ for failure to pay the lien activation fee. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, finding the lien claimant's petition timely filed. Crucially, the WCAB noted a lack of evidence that the lien claimant received notice of the lien conference. Therefore, the WCAB rescinded the dismissal order and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationWCJdismissallien activation feelien conferencenoticeReport and Recommendationrescindedtrial level
References
0
Case No. ADJ11017003
Regular
May 19, 2025

ABEL VAZQUEZ vs. INOCENSIO RENTERIA, ZENITH INSURANCE CO.

The Appeals Board, in an en banc decision, addressed the replacement of a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) when unable to schedule a re-evaluation within 120 days. It clarified that while Administrative Director Rules provide guidance, the Appeals Board retains discretionary power to order QME replacement for good cause, based on factors like delay, prejudice, and efforts to remedy unavailability. The Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, rescinded the prior Findings and Order by the WCJ, and returned the matter for further proceedings, applying its new interpretation prospectively.

WCABen bancQME replacementAD Rule 31.3good causeprocedural issueremoval standardreconsiderationthreshold issuepermanent impairment
References
30
Case No. ADJ3025610 (LAO 0804371) ADJ2399189 (LAO 0833561) ADJ616704 (LAO 0833554) ADJ2590395 (LAO 0833562)
Regular
Jun 18, 2019

ROSA RENTERIA, vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of their lien dismissal for failing to appear at a noticed lien conference. The lien claimant argued human error constituted excusable neglect under CCP 473(b). The WCJ found no good cause for the non-appearance and dismissed the lien. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the dismissal because the explanation of "human error" was skeletal and did not adequately explain the failure to appear or demonstrate good cause.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimWCJRule 10562CCP 473(b)Excusable NeglectGood CauseFox v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 20 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