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. ADJ4684775
Regular
Jan 18, 2011

JOANN LUTZ vs. RUSSELL WARNER dba ROTO ROOTER SERVICES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for PAULA INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, and for FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, LINDA McDONALD, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves appeals regarding an industrial injury award for applicant Joann Lutz. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the finding of industrial injury but modified the award, correcting calculation errors and clarifying employer liability. CIGA's contention that it should be relieved of liability due to other available insurance was rejected, as prior rulings established its binding obligation, and Labor Code section 5804 prevented amending the 2002 stipulated award. The Board also affirmed the denial of applicant's claim for psychiatric injury, deeming the medical evidence insufficient.

CIGAPaula Insurance CompanyFremont Insurance CompanyState Farm Insurance CompanyLinda McDonaldRussell WarnerRoto Rooterstipulated awardapportionmentpsyche injury
References
12
Case No. ADJ4684775 (VEN 0117727) ADJ4381820 (VEN 0117723)
Regular
Dec 19, 2011

JOANNE LUTZ, JOANN LUTZ vs. RUSSELL WARNER dba ROTO ROOTER SERVICES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for PAULA INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, and for FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, LINDA McDONALD, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a prior ruling, allowing CIGA to pursue reimbursement from State Farm for benefits paid due to applicant's industrial injuries. The Board found that unlike a request to alter a prior award, CIGA's petition sought to enforce its statutory right to reimbursement from "available" insurance under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9). Since State Farm, as a jointly and severally liable insurer, appears to be such "available" insurance, the case is remanded for further proceedings on CIGA's reimbursement claim.

California Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAPaula Insurance CompanyFremont Insurance CompanyState Farm Insurance Companystipulated awardreconsiderationreimbursementcontributionother insurance
References
15
Case No. ADJ13419906
Regular
Jun 13, 2025

JOSE HERNANDEZ vs. ROTO DYNAMICS, INC.; COMPWEST NEWPORT

While this matter was pending reconsideration, the parties reached a proposed settlement. To allow the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) to review the settlement, the Appeals Board rescinded the prior decision and returned the case to the trial level. This action allows the WCJ to consider the settlement, with the possibility of reinstating the original decision if the settlement is not approved. This decision does not address the merits of the issues previously pending on reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSettlementRescindedReturned to Trial LevelWCJAdministrative Law JudgeProposed SettlementFurther ProceedingsDecision After Reconsideration
References
1
Case No. ADJ2254122 (VNO 0535926)
Regular
Mar 09, 2010

RICHARD GUERRA vs. MR. ROOTER PLUMBING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the employer's petition for reconsideration, affirming the finding that the applicant was terminated in violation of Labor Code section 132a due to his workers' compensation claim. The employer failed to prove business necessity for the termination, as their stated reasons were inconsistent and unsupported by evidence, and the applicant was singled out due to workers' compensation concerns. However, the Board deferred the issues of reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and benefits pending further medical evidence on the applicant's ability to return to work.

Labor Code section 132aDiscriminationReinstatementRetroactive wagesBusiness necessityPrima facie caseDetrimental treatmentDownsizingQualified injured workerIndependent contractor
References
8
Case No. ADJ11433638
Regular
May 30, 2019

SHACAREY ROOTERS vs. ST. AGNES MEDICAL CENTER/CHE TRINITY INC.

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant who claimed injury to her knees and low back. The defendant sought reconsideration of an award of temporary total disability benefits, arguing the applicant was released to work without restrictions and resigned. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the applicant's treating physician's report lacked substantial evidence, while QME and subsequent PTP opinions supported temporary total disability. The Board further held that the applicant's resignation due to ongoing symptoms and safety concerns did not preclude temporary disability benefits.

Petition for ReconsiderationTemporary Total DisabilityPrimary Treating PhysicianQualified Medical ExaminerSubstantial EvidenceReturn to WorkResignationLabor MarketMedical ImprovementWork Restrictions
References
0
Case No. ADJ6961963
Regular
Oct 07, 2009

ROSTHAM VARTANIAN vs. MIRACLE ROOTER PLUMBING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Applicant's petition for reconsideration of the October 7, 2009 Order Approving Compromise and Release is dismissed for non-compliance with legal requirements. The WCAB suggests the applicant may seek review under Labor Code section 5803.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationWCJLabor Code sections 59025903good causereopenrescindedalteredamended
References
7
Case No. ADJ7507358
Regular
Apr 03, 2023

KENNETH HARLAN vs. RENE M. CASAREZ aka RENE CASAREZ aka RENE BASAREZ aka RENE CAESAREZ dba AFFORDABLE PLUMBING AND ROOTER, HIROSHI CHARLES TANGE, FARMERS INSURANCE

This case concerns a worker injured while performing plumbing services at a new construction project. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that the homeowner, Hiroshi Tange, was the applicant's employer. The Board gave significant weight to the Workers' Compensation Judge's credibility determination of witnesses. Ultimately, the Board found no substantial evidence to overturn the judge's conclusion that the applicant was an employee working for the benefit of the homeowner, who exercised control over the project.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility determinationhomeownerunlicensed contractorindependent contractorpresumption of employmentLabor Code Section 3700Business and Professions Code Section 7125.2
References
12
Showing 1-7 of 7 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