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. ADJ1421850 (FRE0216376)
Regular
Aug 17, 2009

BILL CUSTER vs. SARA LEE BAKERY GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review a finding of serious and willful misconduct by the employer, Sara Lee Bakery Group. The applicant sustained a knee and groin injury due to a broken bread tray, and the initial finding of misconduct was based on testimony about past practices. However, the Board found no evidence that the employer's executive or managing officers knew serious injury was probable or acted with reckless disregard for consequences. Consequently, the prior award finding serious and willful misconduct was rescinded, and a new decision was issued stating the injury was not caused by the employer's serious and willful misconduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code § 4553Findings and AwardReconsiderationRescindedApplicantDefendantRoute SalesmanIndustrial Injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ3891195 (LBO 0394271)
Regular
Jul 26, 2010

Carlos Melara vs. GARDA USA, aka GARDA CL WEST, INC.; ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a previous award. The Board found that while the applicant sustained an industrial injury, it did not result from the employer's serious and willful misconduct. The Board determined that the employer's actions, including conducting safety meetings and having policies against firearm misuse, did not demonstrate the "positive and active disregard of the consequences" required for serious and willful misconduct. Therefore, the 50% increase in benefits for serious and willful misconduct was overturned.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code Section 4553Industrial InjuryBilateral Lower ExtremitiesPsycheGarda USAESISCoin CounterArmored Trucks
References
0
Case No. ADJ10173387; ADJ19907358; ADJ3052978; ADJ3882676; ADJ4063239; ADJ4429907; ADJ883851; ADJ8926536
Regular
Sep 22, 2025

AURORA MUNOZ vs. FIRST GROUP AMERICA, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an applicant's petition for reconsideration of a denial of increased benefits for serious and willful misconduct by her employer. The applicant, a bus driver, was injured when a passenger lift malfunctioned. The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the employer did not engage in serious and willful misconduct, as they reasonably relied on a mechanic's report stating the vehicle was safe to operate after an electrical short. The Board also found no basis for a presumption of serious and willful misconduct due to the employer's alleged failure to respond to discovery requests, as such procedures are not typically applicable in workers' compensation proceedings.

Serious and Willful MisconductLabor Code Section 4553Vehicle Inspection ReportPassenger LiftMechanic's Opinion"OK to Drive"Knowledge of DangerIntentional ActReckless DisregardAdverse Inference
References
11
Case No. ADJ1245747 (BAK 0140714)
Regular
Jul 14, 2009

BALDEMAR SANCHEZ vs. KINLEY CONSTRUCTION, AIG COSTA MESA

The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's finding that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct, thus denying additional benefits under Labor Code § 4553. The applicant had previously settled his industrial injury claim for $60,000, but the settlement explicitly excluded the serious and willful misconduct claim. The Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that the employer's conduct, while negligent, did not rise to the level of serious and willful misconduct. The Board also noted the applicant's petition violated procedural rules regarding spacing, cautioning counsel for future compliance.

Serious and Willful MisconductLabor Code § 4553Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact & AwardCompromise & ReleaseIndustrial InjuryPelvis InjuryHip InjuryAbdomen InjuryBilateral Knees Injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ8739181
Regular
Sep 19, 2018

JOHN JOAQUIN (deceased), JENNIFER JOAQUIN, individually and as Guardian Ad Litem for ANNAMARIE JOAQUIN, MAKAHLAH LYNN JOAQUIN, IZABEL TRINITY JOAQUIN vs. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, permissibly self-insured, administered by YORK

This case concerns a deceased worker's family seeking increased compensation due to alleged serious and willful misconduct by the employer, San Diego Unified School District. The WCAB affirmed the judge's finding that the employer did not engage in serious and willful misconduct, as the employer's actions were deemed a mistake in judgment rather than intentional disregard of danger. The Board also upheld the exclusion of evidence regarding a subsequent remedial measure taken by the employer. A dissenting opinion argued that the employer's decision to send the employee to a dangerous roadside repair location demonstrated reckless disregard for safety, warranting a finding of serious and willful misconduct.

Serious and willful misconductLabor Code section 4553Mercer-Fraser Co.subsequent remedial measureEvidence Code section 1151roadside repairdangerous conditionreckless disregardJohns-Manville Sales Corp.Hawaiian Pineapple Co.
References
8
Case No. ADJ3495329 (SFO 0461473)
Regular
Dec 24, 2010

PAUL HUNT vs. BIGGE CRANE & RIGGING

This case concerns an applicant seeking additional compensation for an industrial injury based on the employer's alleged serious and willful misconduct. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) initially found the employer liable, citing the misconduct of a crane operator and general foreman deemed "managing officers." However, the Court of Appeal reversed this decision, finding neither individual constituted a managing officer whose actions could establish employer misconduct. Consequently, the WCAB has amended its prior award, denying the applicant's claim for serious and willful misconduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code section 4553Managing OfficersIndustrial InjuryCrane OperatorGeneral ForemanCourt of AppealPetition for Reconsideration
References
1
Case No. SRO 0137322
Regular
Apr 01, 2008

JONATHAN D. LOPEZ PACHECO (JONATHAN LOPEZ) vs. WEDGE ROOFING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and ruled that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct. The Board found that while there were safety policy deviations, the employer took reasonable steps and genuinely believed the aerial plank was safe, thus lacking the required intent for serious and willful misconduct. Therefore, the applicant's claim for increased benefits based on employer misconduct was denied.

Serious and willful misconductaerial plankrooferWedge RoofingInc.State Compensation Insurance Fundproximate causefindings and awardpetition for reconsiderationCalOSHA
References
4
Case No. ADJ1323538 (SAC 0305102)
Regular
Jul 20, 2010

BRUCE LOCKWOOD vs. C.C. MEYERS, INC., C.C. MEYERS, AN INDIVIDUAL

This case involves an applicant seeking increased compensation due to serious and willful misconduct by his employer, C.C. Meyers, Inc. The applicant sustained significant injuries when an excavator ran over his foot, leading to its amputation. The Appeals Board overturned the Workers' Compensation Judge's denial, finding that the employer's failure to provide a spotter for the excavator constituted serious and willful misconduct. This failure to provide a spotter, coupled with the employer's knowledge of the risks and intentional disregard for safety, was determined to be a proximate cause of the applicant's injury. As a result, the applicant's compensation will be increased by one-half.

Serious and Willful MisconductEmployer LiabilityIndustrial InjuryProximate CauseSafe Place of EmploymentFailure to Provide SpotterExcavator SafetyCalOSHA Safety Order 1592ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ3144692 (FRE 0190318)
Regular
Apr 13, 2012

KATHRYN FARPELLA vs. R & L BROSAMER, INC.

This case concerns a claim for increased benefits due to an employer's alleged serious and willful misconduct following a fatal industrial injury. The applicant, widow of the deceased worker, argued the defendant employer failed to adequately support a retaining wall, leading to its collapse and her husband's injury. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the employer did not engage in serious and willful misconduct. While the employer was aware of soil challenges and in negotiations for solutions, there was no evidence they knew the probable consequence would be serious injury or deliberately failed to act. The employer was actively attempting corrective actions when the incident occurred.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryRetaining WallCollapsing WallRunning SandsSoil ConditionEngineering Challenges
References
4
Case No. ADJ1875496
Regular
Oct 30, 2009

KENNETH PATTERSON vs. ROSSCRETE ROOFING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The WCAB denied reconsideration of a WCJ's finding that the applicant's injury was not caused by serious and willful misconduct by the employer. A commissioner dissented, arguing that the employer's failure to provide safety equipment constituted serious and willful misconduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code section 4553Industrial Accident CommissionEmployer's DutySafety PrecautionsKnown DangerReckless DisregardCal/OSHA CitationRule 3210(c)
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 2,006 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