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. ADJ7274616
Regular
Jul 20, 2012

ARNULFO CERVANTES vs. PLEASANT VALLEY STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding that an applicant's stroke arose out of and occurred in the course of his employment. The denial was based on a stipulation between the parties that the applicant's job was stressful. This stipulation established "stressful employment" as fact, binding on the parties. The Workers' Compensation Judge correctly utilized this stipulation along with medical evidence to reach the original finding.

WCABReconsiderationStipulationStressful EmploymentPQME EvidenceStrokeArising Out OfCourse Of EmploymentMinutes of HearingSummary of Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ2947144 (SAC 0288806), ADJ4018561 (SAC 0305133)
Regular
Apr 16, 2013

DAN HAGAN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, K-MART and SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted a Petition for Removal regarding case numbers ADJ2947144 and ADJ4018561. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) January 22, 2013 decision. The matter has been returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ. This action indicates the WCAB found the original decision flawed and requires additional judicial review.

WCABPetition for RemovalGranting RemovalRescind DecisionReturn to Trial LevelWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeFurther ProceedingsDecision After RemovalADJ2947144ADJ4018561
References
Case No. ADJ1890563 (SAC 0311772) ADJ3098164 (SAC 0357082)
Regular
Jul 03, 2009

PATRICIA YOUNG vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves Patricia Young seeking workers' compensation benefits from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and State Compensation Insurance Fund. The applicant filed a Petition for Removal, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has reviewed. After considering the petition and the report of the administrative law judge, the Board has denied the Petition for Removal.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDepartment of Corrections and RehabilitationState Compensation Insurance FundAdministrative Law Judge reportDenying removalADJ1890563ADJ3098164SAC 0311772SAC 0357082
References
Case No. SAC 0349873, SAC 0354806
Regular
Mar 20, 2008

LISA CHENNAULT vs. WAL-MART STORES, FRANK GATES SERVICES, CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Lisa Chennault's petition for reconsideration of a denial of her psychological injury claims against Wal-Mart. The original denial was based on Labor Code section 3208.3(h), which bars claims substantially caused by lawful, good faith personnel actions. The Board found a need for further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLisa ChennaultWal-Mart StoresFrank Gates ServicesSAC 0349873SAC 0354806ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeSpecific Injury
References
Case No. SAC 308714, SAC 341852
Regular
Oct 01, 2007

WAYNE LEWIS vs. BEUTLER HEATING AND AIR, ARCH INSURANCE, ST. JOHN'S RETIREMENT VILLAGE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the applicability of either the 1997 or 2005 Schedule for Rating Permanent Disabilities. The applicant argued a December 2004 treating physician's report indicated permanent disability, thus requiring application of the older 1997 Schedule. The Board denied reconsideration, holding that the physician's report did not state the applicant was permanent and stationary, a necessary condition under Labor Code section 4660(d) and *Vera v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.* for the 1997 Schedule to apply. Therefore, the 2005 Schedule was correctly applied.

Permanent disability schedule1997 schedule2005 schedulepermanent and stationaryP\&SLabor Code section 4660(d)treating physician's reportratable disabilityVera v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.August 18
References
Case No. ADJ4630593 (SBR 0315128)
Regular
Jan 25, 2012

GEORGE MONTAGUE vs. GAF LEATHERBACK, ZURICH PRIMARY

This case involves a defendant's petition for removal, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied. The defendant sought to overturn an order requiring production of specific checks and TD/PD payment information. The Board affirmed the order, finding production of cancelled checks necessary to verify payments and clarify discrepancies. Further, the Board determined that current documentation was insufficient to assess interest payments, and the applicant must have the opportunity to review and comment on the provided data. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating SubmissionDirecting Development of RecordTemporary Disability IndemnityPermanent Disability IndemnityInterest CalculationsThird-party administratorsGallagher BassettCrawford and CompanySupplemental Findings and Award
References
Case No. STK 0193177 STK 0193178
Regular
Feb 29, 2008

LESLIE CHOW vs. CENTRO MART, INC., SPRINGFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration of the original May 1, 2007 decision as untimely. The Board denied reconsideration of the December 6, 2007 amended decision, finding that the changes made were clerical corrections to TD and PD rates, not substantial judicial modifications. Therefore, the defendant's arguments regarding the timeliness and merits of the amended decision were rejected.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAwardOrderWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Average Weekly WagePermanent Disability (PD)ApportionmentTemporary Disability (TD)
References
Case No. ADJ9844864, ADJ9844866
Regular
May 03, 2019

YOLANDA ALVAREZ vs. KABIR BLUESTAR dba WINE VALLEY INN, AMTRUST

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's decision was not a final order. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Applicant failed to prove the defendant neglected or refused to furnish reasonable medical care, as defendant provided other MPN physicians after the initial one declined. Therefore, the applicant remains limited to treatment within the defendant's Medical Provider Network.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalJoint Findings and Orderworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJmedical treatmentLabor Code section 4600Medical Provider NetworkMPN
References
Case No. ADJ11428234
Regular
Oct 17, 2025

RAMON COLLADO vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CENTINELA STATE PRISON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to study the factual and legal issues in Ramon Collado's case against the California Department of Corrections and Centinela State Prison. Collado sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings and Order from July 28, 2021, which concluded he failed to prove an industrially caused heart/hypertension injury between December 20, 2012, and August 14, 2018. The Board found the Qualified Medical Evaluator's opinion on whether Collado's condition was an aggravation or mere exacerbation of prior injuries was unclear and contradictory, failing to constitute substantial medical evidence. Consequently, the Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings, including the development of the medical record and a determination on the applicability of Labor Code section 3212 presumptions.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRamon ColladoCalifornia Department of CorrectionsCentinela State PrisonState Compensation Insurance FundOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationFindings and Orderworkers' compensation administrative law judgeindustrially caused injuryexacerbation
References
Case No. ADJ7903870
Regular
May 13, 2013

JUDITH FIGUEROA vs. AG FORCE, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the WCJ's decision. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found that the lien claimant failed to establish the employer neglected to provide required notice of rights under the Medical Provider Network (MPN). Consequently, the reasonableness and necessity of the lien claimant's medical treatment became moot. The primary issue focused on the validity of the MPN and the employer's medical control, not the treatment itself.

WCABAG FORCEINTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICESADJ7903870DENY RECONSIDERATIONMPNMEDICAL TREATMENTLIEN CLAIMANTKNIGHT V. UNITED PARCEL SERVICEWCJ REPORT
References
Showing 1-10 of 70 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