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. ADJ1111433 (LBO 0395453)
Regular
Aug 01, 2013

LUZ ALFARO vs. NATIONAL FREIGHT INDUSTRIES, GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Luz Alfaro's Petition for Reconsideration against National Freight Industries because it was filed **untimely**. The applicant failed to file the petition within the statutory 20-day period, plus 5 days for mailing, after the April 18, 2013, Findings, Award and Order. Therefore, the Board adopted the judge's report and incorporated its reasoning in dismissing the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportFindings Award and OrderLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013DismissalApplicantDefendant
References
0
Case No. ADJ17382484
Regular
Oct 13, 2025

Benedo Alfaro Vasquez vs. Young's Commercial Transfer, National Interstate Insurance Company

The applicant, Benedo Alfaro Vasquez (deceased), sought reconsideration of a July 14, 2025 Findings and Order by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The WCJ had found that the applicant's injury occurred during a normal commute and was not within the course of employment under the 'going and coming' rule, ordering that the applicant take nothing. The Appeals Board has granted the petition for reconsideration, deferring a final decision pending further review of the merits and the entire record in light of applicable statutory and decisional law, to ensure a complete understanding and a just and reasoned decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGoing and Coming RulePetition for ReconsiderationInjury AOE/COESubstantial EvidenceLabor Code Section 3600Motor Vehicle AccidentCommercial Truck DriverTransmission of Case60-Day Rule
References
21
Case No. ADJ8741812
Regular
May 20, 2019

STEVEN ALFARO vs. AYERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE GROUP

This case involves an employer, Ayers Construction Company, accused of discriminating against an employee, Steven Alfaro, for exercising his workers' compensation rights under Labor Code section 132a. The applicant alleged he was terminated shortly after requesting medical treatment, and despite a medical release, was denied reinstatement while other, less senior employees were retained. The Appeals Board affirmed the prior decision finding discrimination, determining the employer failed to provide a credible business necessity for the discharge. The employer must pay increased compensation, back wages and benefits, with adjustments for temporary disability payments received.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 132adiscriminationretaliationreinstatementincreased compensationback wagesbenefitstemporary disabilitymedical treatment
References
0
Case No. ADJ7785974
Regular
Mar 20, 2019

REFUGIO JOSE ALFARO (Deceased) vs. INTERSTATE HOME SERVICES, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST GROUP

This case involved a worker's compensation claim for death benefits after Refugio Alfaro died from a myocardial infarction. The defendant contested that the death was industrially caused, challenging the qualified medical examiner's (QME) opinion. The Appeals Board affirmed the finding of industrial causation, finding the QME's opinion substantial evidence supported by deposition testimony. However, the Board rescinded the award and returned the case for further proceedings to identify and determine eligibility of dependents, as the original applicant spouse was deceased.

AOE/COEmyocardial infarctiondeath benefitsQMEsubstantial evidencereconsiderationWCJindustrial causationdependencyaggravated condition
References
8
Case No. ADJ8863089, ADJ8911931
Regular
Apr 02, 2020

WILBER ALFARO vs. GORON BLAVER AN INDIVIDUAL DBA GORA CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Wilber Alfaro's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The petition was received on March 6, 2020, more than 25 days after the WCJ's February 10, 2020 decision. The WCAB emphasized that filing proof of mailing is insufficient; the petition must be *received* by the WCAB within the statutory period. As the time limit for filing a petition for reconsideration is jurisdictional, the WCAB lacked the authority to consider the untimely petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingWCJ DecisionCalifornia Workers' CompensationLabor Code SectionsCode of RegulationsJurisdictional LimitAppeals Board AuthorityMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. Hagler
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Alfaro v. Vardaris Tech, Inc.

The court did not abuse its discretion in denying partial summary judgment regarding opt-out letters, inferring defendants drafted them to solicit class members' exclusion. However, the appellate court found errors in the trial court's factual findings under CPLR 3212 (g) concerning underreported hours and underpayments to worker Guzman by Vardaris, as issues of fact remain. Consequently, a motion seeking a stay was denied.

Class Action LitigationSummary Judgment DenialOpt-Out LettersSolicitation EthicsWage UnderpaymentPayroll FraudAppellate ReviewFactual Findings DisputeCPLR ProcedureStanding to Appeal
References
6
Case No. ADJ1697094 (POM 0239963)
Regular
May 30, 2014

DENISE ALFARO vs. DEUTSCH COMPANY, TRAVELERS INSURANCE/FIREMAN'S FUND

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board affirmed a prior award finding the applicant sustained an industrial injury to her back and leg, resulting in 80% permanent disability after apportionment. The Board also upheld the entitlement to further medical treatment, including home health care, while keeping the record open for potential liens. Notably, the applicant passed away during the reconsideration process, prompting the Board to suggest the judge address potential accrued benefits for dependents. The employer's petition for reconsideration, contesting the permanent disability finding and home health care entitlement, was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardCumulative TraumaTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityApportionmentHome Health CareLabor Code section 4600(h)Prescription
References
0
Case No. ADJ10667998
Regular
Mar 21, 2019

GRECIA ALFARO vs. APPLE, INC., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves an applicant who sustained admitted injuries to her thoracic spine and left arm after a slip and fall at work. The applicant also claimed industrial injury to her psyche and right hip, which the employer contested. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration of the judge's finding that the applicant did not sustain an industrial injury to her right hip. The WCAB deferred to the judge's credibility determination, noting that the applicant's reporting of hip pain was inconsistent and poorly documented by treating physicians. The Board also cited that one physician's opinion can constitute substantial evidence, even if it conflicts with other medical opinions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJCredibility DeterminationSubstantial EvidencePhysician's OpinionAdmitted InjuryDenied InjuryRight HipPsyche
References
3
Case No. ADJ676729 (VNO 0542059)
Regular
Oct 28, 2009

COMULO ALFARO vs. MOTORCAR PARTS OF AMERICA, CHUBB GROUP LOS ANGELES

The Petition for Reconsideration is denied based on review of the record and the WCJ's report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeDenying ReconsiderationMotorcar Parts of AmericaChubb Group Los AngelesRomulo AlfaroADJ676729VNO 0542059WCJ Report
References
0
Case No. ADJ8548139
Regular
Jul 11, 2014

HECTOR ALFARO vs. CONSOLIDATED PERSONNEL SERVICES, JR RESIDENTIAL, LUMBERMAN'S UNDERWRITING ALLIANCE

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted removal and rescinded an administrative law judge's order vacating submission to develop the record. The defendant argued that the order prejudiced their due process rights by allowing the applicant to further develop evidence on apportionment when the threshold issue of injury AOE/COE had not yet been decided. The Board found that developing the record on apportionment was premature before a determination on causation. Consequently, the case was returned to the WCJ for a decision on the submitted issues.

Petition for RemovalVacating SubmissionDevelop the RecordApportionmentInjury AOE/COEPrimary Treating PhysicianSupplemental ReportIrreparable HarmDue ProcessRescind Order
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 11 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