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. 04-15-00021-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Board of Adjustment of the City of San Antonio v. Michael and Theresa Hayes

The County Court reversed the Board of Adjustment's action regarding Appeal No. A-14-049. This reversal means that the City of San Antonio Permit No. 1951114 to construct a guardrail remains revoked. Additionally, the Board of Adjustment's action from January 13, 2014, in Case Number A-13-0732 remains final. The court also denied the Board of Adjustment's plea to the jurisdiction and their objection to the evidence.

Zoning DisputeAdministrative AppealBuilding PermitsLocal GovernmentProperty RightsJudicial ReviewTexas LawGuardrail RegulationCode EnforcementSan Antonio
References
6
Case No. 3-92-291-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 10, 1993

Ronald David Patton v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Jean Auvenshine and American International Adjustment Company, Inc.

Ronald David Patton sued National Union Fire Insurance Company, Jean Auvenshine, and American International Adjustment Company, Inc., alleging violations of the duty of good faith and fair dealing related to his workers' compensation claim. Patton had injured his back in 1985, and his claim was formally denied by National Union in June 1987. The trial court granted a take-nothing summary judgment in favor of the appellees, ruling that Patton's suit was barred by the two-year statute of limitations. The Court of Appeals affirmed this judgment, holding that the cause of action accrued at the time of the denial of coverage in June 1987, and that the tort was not a continuous one, nor was the statute of limitations tolled by subsequent events or the involvement of an adjuster.

Workers' CompensationInsurance Bad FaithStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingTexas Court of AppealsDenial of CoverageAccrual of Cause of ActionContinuous TortInsurance Adjuster Liability
References
4
Case No. ADJ1146871 (SAC 0349672)
Regular
Jun 14, 2010

ZORICA ILIC vs. STANFORD HOSPITAL & CLINICS, SEDGWICK 2065 OAKLAND

This case involves an applicant with a $78\%$ permanent disability rating for admitted industrial injuries to her low back and psyche. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the administrative law judge erred in applying a diminished future earning capacity adjustment, Labor Code $\S 4664$ apportionment, and relying on applicant's medical evaluators. The primary issue deferred was the calculation of the State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) adjustment under Labor Code $\S 4659(\text{c})$ pending a Supreme Court decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to defer the SAWW adjustment calculation but otherwise affirmed the original findings, including the $78\%$ permanent disability rating.

Labor Code § 4663Labor Code § 4664Labor Code § 4659(c)SAWWDFECDuncan v. WCABReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityApportionmentQualified Medical Evaluators
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Heinsohn v. Trans-Con Adjustment Bureau

Robert Heinsohn sued his former employer, Trans-Con Adjustment Bureau, alleging wrongful termination after suffering a work-related injury, claiming the company discharged him to avoid a workers' compensation claim. The trial court granted the company's motion for a directed verdict, citing no evidence of damages. Heinsohn appealed this decision. The appellate court found sufficient evidence of damages, including lost wages and medical expenses, to overcome a directed verdict. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial, asserting that a jury should have been allowed to consider the evidence.

Workers' CompensationRetaliatory DischargeEmployment LawDirected VerdictDamagesLost WagesMedical ExpensesAppellate ReviewTexas LawBurden of Proof
References
6
Case No. MON 322663, LAO 0850418
Regular
Dec 10, 2007

DANIEL PAN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's decision. The Board found that the defendant must include projected future cost-of-living adjustments based on the State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) when calculating the present value of the permanent disability award to determine attorney's fees. The Board affirmed that a 4.7% SAWW adjustment, representing a 50-year average, is a rational basis for these calculations, and the defendant's contention of speculation was unfounded.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardPermanent Total DisabilityLabor Code Section 4659(c)State Average Weekly WagePresent Value of AwardCommutation of Attorney's FeesDisability Evaluation UnitAnnual Adjustments
References
1
Case No. ADJ7971001
Regular
Apr 16, 2013

DARRYL OYAS vs. CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a dispute over the attorney's fees awarded in a workers' compensation claim for a 100% permanent disability award. The applicant's attorney argues the administrative law judge erred by excluding the State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) adjustment factor and by using the Uniform Reduction method for commutation instead of the Uniform Increasing Reduction (UIR) method. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow the judge to recalculate the attorney's fees, incorporating a reasonable SAWW adjustment and applying the UIR commutation method, while still considering factors for determining the fee's reasonableness. The Board emphasized separating the calculation of the award's commuted value from the determination of the attorney's fee percentage.

State Compensation Insurance FundWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings and AwardAttorney's FeePermanent DisabilityState Average Weekly Wage (SAWW)Uniform Increasing Reduction (UIR) methodCommutationStipulations with Request for AwardCorrectional Officer
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Greece Support Service Employees Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations Board

This case concerns an appeal regarding the proper application of Civil Service Law § 209-a (1) (e) to salary provisions in an expired collective bargaining agreement between an unnamed petitioner and the Greece Central School District. The agreement, from July 1992 to June 1995, included cost-of-living adjustments for salary schedules during its term. After the agreement expired, the District continued existing salary schedules but ceased further cost-of-living adjustments for 1995-1996, prompting the petitioner to file an improper practice charge. The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) reversed an Administrative Law Judge's decision, concluding that the agreement did not mandate continued cost-of-living adjustments post-expiration. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitioner's subsequent CPLR article 78 petition seeking annulment of PERB's determination. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, deferring to PERB's expertise and finding its interpretation that the adjustments were limited to the agreement's term to be reasonable and legally permissible.

Collective Bargaining AgreementSalary AdjustmentCost-of-Living AdjustmentPublic EmployerImproper Practice ChargeCivil Service LawPublic Employment Relations BoardJudicial ReviewCPLR Article 78Statutory Interpretation
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Bruzzese v. Guardsman Elevator Co.

In 1994, the claimant sustained head, neck, and back injuries at work, leading to an award for permanent partial disability, which included a wage expectancy adjustment under Workers’ Compensation Law § 14 (5). Following back surgery in 1998, the case was reopened, and the claimant was found to be temporarily totally disabled. Benefits for this temporary total disability were calculated based on the claimant's average weekly wage at the time of injury, without applying the wage expectancy adjustment. The claimant appealed, arguing that since the permanent partial disability preceded the temporary total disability, the wage expectancy adjustment should also apply to the latter period. The court disagreed, affirming the Workers’ Compensation Board's decision, citing established case law that Workers’ Compensation Law § 14 (5) is applicable only to awards for permanent partial disability and not temporary disability.

Wage expectancyTemporary total disabilityPermanent partial disabilityWorkers' Compensation benefitsBack injuryAppellate reviewDisability calculationWorkers' Compensation BoardAverage weekly wage
References
1
Case No. ADJ312652 (STK 0204453)
Regular
Nov 14, 2008

AMADOR CISNEROS vs. CBC FRAMING and VIRGINIA SURETY, adjusted by CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED RESOURCES

This case involves a dispute over a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision to set aside a prior order and require the defendant to produce the claims adjuster for testimony. The WCAB denied the defendant's petition for removal, finding no abuse of discretion by the judge who properly used WCAB Rule § 10859 to rescind the prior order and allow for further proceedings. The defendant's arguments regarding the applicant's failure to produce the adjuster at trial were deemed premature as no order compelling appearance had been issued.

WCABPetition for RemovalOrder Setting Aside FindingsWCJ DiscretionWCAB Rule 10859Claims AdjusterMandatory Settlement ConferencePetition for ReconsiderationWCAB Rule 10843(b)AOE/COE
References
1
Case No. ADJ9103955
Regular
Aug 25, 2014

EMMANUEL BRISENO vs. CALTRANS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted By STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a workers' compensation appeal where the defendant, Caltrans, sought reconsideration of an award of temporary disability benefits. Caltrans argued the award should credit benefits already paid by the Employment Development Department (EDD) to prevent double recovery. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, agreeing that the award needed adjustment for the EDD's potential lien. Consequently, the Board amended the award to require the parties to adjust the benefit amount, taking into account the EDD's potential lien interest.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ9103955Emmanuel BrisenoCALTRANSPermissibly Self-InsuredState Compensation Insurance FundTemporary Disability IndemnityEmployment Development Department (EDD)EDD LienDouble Recovery
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 970 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