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. ADJ1778428 (VNO 0454872)
Regular
Oct 09, 2013

RAUL DURAN vs. L.I. MARBLE, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Dan H. Kim, M.D. (lien claimant) regarding an order dismissing their lien for failure to pay the required activation fee. The Workers' Compensation Judge recommended denial, finding the lien claimant had proper notice of the conference and previously had the correct applicant name and case number. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied reconsideration, cautioning the petitioner against disclosing the injured worker's Social Security number.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportinjured worker privacySocial Security numberOrder Dismissing Lienlien activation feePinnacle Lien Servicesdatabase discrepancyEAMS file
References
Case No. ADJ367503 (ANA 0407530)
Regular
Jun 27, 2013

MANUEL GONZALEZ AGUINIGA vs. WEBCOR BUILDERS, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the prior order compelling a release for a Social Security number ending in 2221. While acknowledging a significant identity dispute raised by the employer, the Board found no basis to compel this specific record release as irrelevant to the employer's payroll records for the applicant's known Social Security number. The Board suggested the WCJ address the applicant's identity, as it impacts the case's proceedings. The employer had doubts about the applicant's identity, particularly regarding earnings and discrepancies in Social Security numbers.

Petition for RemovalSocial Security ReleaseFifth Amendment RightsIdentity of ApplicantWCJ OrderAgreed Medical EvaluatorPretrial Conference StatementMandatory Settlement ConferenceWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicant Identity Dispute
References
Case No. ADJ8147541
Regular
Apr 26, 2013

VERONICA ARZAGA vs. KOOSHAREM CORP. dba SELECT STAFFING, ESIS/ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal regarding the applicant's social security number. While the defendant argued the information was crucial for discovery, the Board adopted the WCJ's report which found social security number disclosure is voluntary under California regulations. The majority determined the defendant failed to show significant prejudice or irreparable harm from the order denying further compelled disclosure. A dissenting opinion argued for granting removal to require disclosure, deeming it relevant for identification and distinguishing it from protected immigration status information.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for Removalworkers' compensation administrative law judgesocial security numberdiscoverydepositionFifth Amendmentself-incriminationOrder to Compel Production of Identificationapportionment
References
Case No. MON 0337678 MON 0347063
Regular
Jul 20, 2007

DAN F. MARINO vs. BP AMERICA, ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed BP America's petition for reconsideration, finding the Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) order was conditional, not final. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's denial, and remanded the case. The remand is for the WCJ to determine if there is good cause to amend a stipulated award due to the applicant receiving EDD benefits under a different Social Security number, which could result in duplicate payments.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBP AmericaESISPetition to Amend OrderStipulation of PartiesMutual Mistake of FactInadvertencyEmployment Development Department (EDD) benefitsSocial Security Number discrepancyExpedited Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ3283274 (VNO 0386537) ADJ4545965 (VNO 0386536) ADJ3421140 (VNO 0347301)
Regular
Jan 25, 2010

BARBARA STRAUSS vs. WEST MARINE, INC., CIGA for RELIANCE in liquidation, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY, FIREMAN'S FUND

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denying reconsideration. The error involved the incorrect assignment of ADJ and VNO numbers to the relevant case numbers. The WCAB is correcting this error to accurately reflect the case numbers as ADJ3283274 and VNO 0386537. This correction ensures proper record-keeping for applicant Barbara Strauss and defendants West Marine, Inc., et al.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Denying ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeClerical ErrorCorrected Case NumberADJ NumberVNO NumberReversal of NumbersLiquidation
References
Case No. ADJ4481004 (LAO 0843231)
Regular
Nov 15, 2011

ARARAT SARKISIAN vs. VAHAN ENGIBARIAN DBA VAHAN'S ROYAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and returned the case to the trial level. The applicant sought commutation of his award to purchase a home, arguing it would benefit his Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. The WCJ denied this, believing commutation wouldn't impact SSI and that buying a home wasn't in the applicant's best interest. The Board found the record insufficient and ordered applicant's attorney to consult with a Social Security law expert to clarify the impact of commutation on SSI.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCommutation of AwardSocial Security Supplemental Income (SSI)Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF)Findings and OrderWCJBest InterestHome Ownership
References
Case No. ADJ11886646
Regular
Nov 22, 2019

ROMANA HERRERA vs. SANTA BARBARA SMOKEHOUSE, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and corrected a clerical error, adjusting the applicant's average weekly wage from $\$888.55$ to $\$890.55$. The Board found the applicant's testimony credible regarding concurrent employment, despite a minor error in a social security number on an earnings statement. Defendant's arguments regarding the admissibility of evidence and a statement about work restrictions were rejected.

Expedited Finding of Fact and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationAverage Weekly WageConcurrent EmploymentADP Earnings StatementSocial Security NumberSubstantial EvidenceCredibility DeterminationClerical ErrorTemporary Disability Indemnity
References
Case No. ADJ12061993, ADJ12061994
Regular
Mar 13, 2023

VICTOR SAMUEL XAMBA SOC vs. KADAMI ENTERPRISES, EMPLOYERS ASSURANCE CO.

This case involves a Petition for Removal that was denied by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, or that reconsideration would be inadequate. The underlying dispute concerns discovery rulings made during a supervised deposition, specifically regarding the admissibility of questions about the applicant's social security number and education. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) who also recommended denial, finding the petition lacked merit and that the issues could be addressed through reconsideration.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJRemovalPrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdmissibilitySupervised DepositionFifth Amendment
References
Case No. ADJ7904261
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

MIRIAM D. ESPINOSA vs. JOSE L. SERRANO dba EL BAJIO MEXICAN RESTAURANT, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Miriam Espinoza's petition for reconsideration of the denial of temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found the applicant failed to prove she was legally entitled to work in the United States at the time of her claim for TPD. This conclusion was based on evidence of a false social security number provided at hire and the applicant's assertion of Fifth Amendment rights regarding her immigration status. Therefore, the applicant was not entitled to benefits based on an ability to return to modified or alternative work.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeIndustrial InjuryTemporary Partial DisabilityImmigration StatusRight to WorkSocial Security NumberGreen CardFifth Amendment
References
Case No. SAC 0344347; SAC 0344348 SAC 0343619; SAC 0344525
Regular
Apr 11, 2008

LARRY MILLER vs. SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES, Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was based on an interlocutory order, not a final decision. The Board also denied the applicant's request for removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Ultimately, the applicant's request to redact their Social Security Number from a procedural notice was deemed unnecessary to address at this stage.

Petition for ReconsiderationDenying RemovalSocial Security Number RedactionInterlocutory Procedural OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiability DeterminationExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Injury
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,046 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