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. STK 0192031
Regular
Aug 10, 2007

JOSE CRUZ vs. TRACY DODGE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reconsidered an award of continuing temporary disability benefits, finding that payments are limited to 104 weeks from the initial payment date under Labor Code section 4656(c)(1). The Board clarified that an injury to multiple body parts from a single incident still constitutes a "single injury" for purposes of this limitation. Jurisdiction was reserved to determine the exact date of the first temporary disability payment to calculate the 104-week period.

Labor Code section 4656(c)(1)Hawkins v. Amberwood Productstemporary disability indemnity104 compensable weeksdate of first paymentsingle injuryspecific injurysection 3208.1(a)temporary total disabilitytemporary partial disability
References
Case No. ADJ9365068
Regular
May 26, 2015

JOSE PORTILLO vs. CITISTAFF SOLUTIONS, INC., TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a worker's compensation applicant who sought reconsideration of a decision denying his claim for injury AOE/COE. The applicant alleged a forklift incident caused his injuries, but the WCJ found he failed to prove the incident occurred or that his employer was notified prior to his termination. While the WCAB adopted the WCJ's findings, they also noted that even if an incident and notice were proven, the applicant failed to provide substantial medical evidence connecting post-termination treatment to the alleged injury, thus precluding benefits under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10).

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility determinationpost-termination defenseLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)forklift incidentdeposition testimonymedical treatmentnotice to employer
References
Case No. ADJ7033642
Regular
Jul 24, 2013

JOHNNY REVELS vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Los Angeles Unified School District's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report, finding that a single physician's opinion can constitute substantial evidence, even if it contradicts other medical opinions. The Board also noted the defendant's violation of procedural rules regarding single-spacing. The petition was denied based on the established medical evidence and procedural issues.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportSubstantial EvidencePhysician OpinionRegulation ViolationsRules 10232(a)(11)Rule 10845(a)Single SpacingPetition Denial
References
Case No. ADJ1576347 (FRE 0235267) ADJ8047239
Regular
Sep 12, 2013

MICHAEL MANFREDI vs. CITY OF FRESNO, AMERICAN ALL-RISK LOSS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Michael Manfredi's petition for reconsideration. Manfredi, a police officer, sought to establish two separate cumulative trauma injuries for his coronary artery disease and hypertension, rather than the single injury found by the WCJ. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the continuous need for medical treatment between periods of exposure constituted a single compensable injury, citing *Western Growers*. Therefore, the original award of 20% permanent disability stands.

Cumulative traumacoronary artery diseasehypertensionpermanent disabilityreconsiderationJoint Findings of Fact and AwardWCJ ReportWestern Growers v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Board (Austin)separate injuriessingle injury
References
Case No. ADJ10159316
Regular
Sep 25, 2017

Rowdy Rushing vs. Foster Farms

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding that Rowdy Rushing did not sustain a left shoulder injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment with Foster Farms. The Administrative Law Judge found the applicant's testimony regarding a pallet striking his arm not credible, noting inconsistencies with coworker statements and medical reports. Specifically, the applicant's account of the incident and the mechanism of injury was deemed unlikely and not supported by Dr. Ozaeta's medical opinion, which concluded the MRI findings were inconsistent with the described incident. Therefore, the Board affirmed the judge's take-nothing order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFoster FarmsRowdy RushingFindings and OrderTake nothing orderIndustrial injuryLeft shoulderOctober 92015Taper/packer
References
Case No. ADJ7503292
Regular
Mar 26, 2013

RIGOBERTO MENDOZA vs. PIZZA MIZZA, GUARD INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Rigoberto Mendoza's petition for reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) finding that Mendoza did not sustain the alleged industrial injury. The WCJ's decision was based on an evaluation of witness credibility and inconsistencies in Mendoza's account of the injury. Specifically, the WCJ found the employer's testimony more credible regarding the timing and nature of the reported injury. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination, leading to the denial of reconsideration.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDenialCredibilityGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.ApplicantEmployerIndustrial InjuryBack InjuryLeg Injury
References
Case No. SAC 0350983
Regular
Jan 18, 2008

MICHAEL A. ADAIR vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA CDCR-FOLSOM, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a correctional officer's claim for psychological injury stemming from workplace incidents. The defendant contested the finding of injury, arguing specific events were good-faith actions by supervisors. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's finding that the incidents were not lawful, nondiscriminatory, good-faith actions. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility determination regarding the applicant's testimony and the inadequacy of investigations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedPsychiatric InjuryCorrectional OfficerDepartment of Corrections and RehabilitationFolsom PrisonState Compensation Insurance FundLabor Code Section 3208.3Good Faith Personal ActionsSkelley Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ10430899
Regular
Sep 11, 2017

WILLIAM DULL vs. CITY OF FRESNO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued that the applicant's April 21, 2016 injury was a "compensable consequence" of an earlier 2010 industrial injury, not a new one. However, the Board found that the 2016 incident occurred during the course of employment and, even if triggered by medication from the prior injury, was a new industrial injury. This was because the statute of limitations for claiming "new and further disability" from the 2010 injury had expired.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boarddeputy sheriffmotor vehicle accidentcompensable consequencenew and further disabilitystatute of limitationsarising out of employmentcourse of employmentidiopathic seizurecontributing cause
References
Case No. ADJ10958168
Regular
Apr 09, 2019

LYN SAMUEL JEFFERS vs. GLENDALE ADVENTIST MEDICAL CENTER, ADVENTIST HEALTH

This case involves a worker's compensation applicant who claimed her left knee injury occurred when she fainted at work on February 8, 2017. Medical reports from her treating physicians documented acute left knee pain, a torn lateral meniscus, degenerative changes, and temporary total disability following the incident. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found the applicant's testimony credible, supported by medical evidence, and determined the injury arose out of and occurred in the course of employment. Therefore, the employer's petition for reconsideration was denied.

AOE/COEPrimary Treating PhysicianTemporary Total DisabilityPreponderance of the EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceWCJ CredibilityPetition for ReconsiderationLateral Meniscus TearDegenerative ChangesChondromalacia
References
Case No. ADJ3864552 (LAO 0788138)
Regular
Jan 03, 2011

ANTONIETA GUERRERO vs. WELLPOINT HEALTH NETWORK, INC., ZURICH LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION For FREMONT In Liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award due to insufficient analysis by the WCJ regarding the date(s) of cumulative trauma. The Board found the WCJ's decision lacked specific reference to evidence, particularly on whether multiple or a single period of cumulative trauma applied. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, a new decision, and adequate analysis of all contentions, including permanent disability and apportionment.

Cumulative traumaOveruse syndromeFibromyalgiaPsyche injuryPermanent total disabilityApportionmentAttorney feesFindings and AwardReconsiderationWCJ
References
Showing 1-10 of 283 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