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. ADJ7564894
Regular
Jun 07, 2013

FLOR DE MARIA DE LEON vs. PORTO'S BAKERY, INC, TRAVELERS

Here's a summary for a lawyer: This case involves a lien claimant, First Choice Health UBC, whose lien was dismissed for failure to provide proof of timely payment of the lien activation fee at a lien conference. While the claimant's representative appeared for "FCH" and later submitted proof of payment for a different, similarly named entity (First Choice Medical Group), no proof was provided for First Choice Health UBC itself. The WCJ recommended denial of reconsideration, finding that the claimant failed to meet the requirements of Labor Code section 4903.06(a)(4) by not presenting evidence of activation fee payment for the correct entity at the conference, thus warranting dismissal with prejudice. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied the petition.

Lien ClaimantActivation FeePetition for ReconsiderationDismissal with PrejudiceContinuous TraumaServerBack InjuryKnee InjuryLower ExtremitiesNervous/Psyche
References
Case No. ADJ10607102
Regular
Aug 13, 2018

DEBORAH MUNDY vs. NANCY SWIFT dba SORELLA ITALIAN RESTAURANT, PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's decision finding no temporary or permanent disability from a work-related cervical spine injury. The Board found that the Qualified Medical Examiner's (QME) reports did not constitute substantial evidence due to inconsistencies and lack of basis, particularly regarding the causation of the injury. The case is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings to develop the record. This includes potentially obtaining supplemental reports from the QME after reviewing additional chiropractic records or appointing a new medical examiner.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderCervical Spine InjuryTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical TreatmentQualified Medical ExaminerSubstantial EvidenceSlip and Fall
References
Case No. ADJ8752161
Regular
Sep 13, 2013

Daniel Rita vs. Cheesecake Factory, ACE American Insurance

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior finding of industrial injury for applicant Daniel Rita. The Board found that applicant failed to meet his burden of proof to establish an industrial slip and fall injury. This decision was based on the applicant's testimony being directly contradicted by three witnesses, rendering his self-serving statement about the fall less persuasive. Therefore, the Board ruled that no industrial injury occurred.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings of FactIndustrial InjuryBurden of ProofPreponderance of the EvidenceCredibilityWitness TestimonySlip and FallServer
References
Case No. ADJ6907549, ADJ9156151
Regular
May 28, 2015

Leticia Avila vs. University of California Irvine Medical Center, SEDGWICK CMS

This case clarifies that an employee must *receive* their Independent Medical Review (IMR) application within 30 days of the Utilization Review (UR) denial, plus a 5-day extension if the denial was served by mail. The applicant's IMR application was deemed untimely because it was received by the Administrative Director one day after the extended deadline. This decision affirms the WCJ's finding that the applicant's IMR application was not filed within the mandatory statutory timeframe. The concurring opinion stresses the importance of timely adherence to all timeframes within the UR/IMR process.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndependent Medical ReviewUtilization ReviewLabor Code section 4610.5(h)(1)Administrative Director's Rule 9792.10.1(b)(2)Code of Civil Procedure section 1013(a)timely filingsubmission datereceipt dateservice by mail
References
Case No. ADJ8382229
Regular
Mar 21, 2014

JOHN MOLTER vs. ADVANTAGE RESOURCING, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

In this workers' compensation case, the Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that applicant sustained an industrial knee injury and that the claim was not barred as a post-termination claim. The employer argued the claim was invalid because the applicant didn't report the injury before termination and the employer lacked notice. However, the Board found sufficient notice was given when a manager observed the applicant limping shortly before termination, coupled with the applicant's subsequent email reporting the injury. The Board also found no due process violation due to an ex parte communication, as the WCJ properly handled the communication by serving it on all parties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPost-termination claimLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)Notice of injuryDue processEx parte communicationWCJIndustrial injuryRight knee
References
Case No. MON 176608
Regular
Apr 23, 2007

MERCED F. POWER vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

The applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award, arguing the administrative law judge erred by reducing permanent disability based on sub rosa films and by failing to rule on a motion for sanctions. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the original award but amending it to defer the sanctions issue. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardpermanent disabilitysub rosa filmsmotion for sanctionsWCJAppeals Boardindustrial injurycashierfood server
References
Case No. ADJ1402606 (GRO 0034675)
Regular
Dec 15, 2008

SUSAN MOORE vs. VIC'S CAFE, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original Findings and Award, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board found the original decision flawed because the judge relied on the applicant's unsubstantiated deposition testimony regarding her other employments without directly observing her credibility. The Board ordered the judge to make complete findings on the rate of temporary disability indemnity, as the original award lacked definitive calculations and relied on unverified earnings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationTemporary Disability IndemnityOther EmploymentsEarnings CalculationWCJ CredibilityUnsubstantiated EvidenceHourly WageHouse CleaningFood Server
References
Case No. ADJ9664433
Regular
Jan 27, 2020

DANA GRACE vs. PANINO SANTA YNEZ, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for permanent total disability due to an industrial injury sustained by Dana Grace as a server. Both applicant and defendant sought reconsideration of the initial finding regarding applicant's average weekly earnings. The Board granted both petitions, amending the decision to establish applicant's average weekly wage at $553.50, based on a 40-hour workweek at $11.50 per hour plus a meal allowance. This revised wage establishes a permanent total disability indemnity rate of $369.00 per week, before cost of living adjustments.

Average Weekly EarningsEarning CapacityPermanent Total DisabilityReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardIndustrial InjuryWCJPetitions for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 4659(c)Evidence Code Section 1401(a)
References
Showing 1-8 of 8 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