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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. VNO 0448330
Regular
Sep 01, 2007

ROSA ROMERO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Legally Uninsured, adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration and granted the applicant's petition. The Board affirmed the original award, which found industrial injuries to the applicant's right upper extremity, shoulder, and spine, resulting in temporary disability and $47\%$ permanent disability. The applicant's psychiatric claim was correctly barred due to less than six months of employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRosa RomeroState of California Department of Social ServicesLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundState Contract Serviceshome caretakerindustrial injuriesright upper extremityshoulder
References
Case No. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ6585876
Regular
Aug 27, 2014

VICENTE JACKSON vs. NORTHRUP GRUMMAN CORPRATION, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

This case concerns applicant Vicente Jackson's claim for cumulative trauma injury sustained while employed by Vought Aircraft in Georgia and Florida. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's finding of no subject matter jurisdiction. The Board found insufficient evidence that Vought's employment of Jackson constituted a continuation of his original California employment contract with Northrup. Acceptance of a new job offer in Florida from Vought created a new employment contract, superseding any prior California contract.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNorthrup GrummanInsurance Company of the State of PennsylvaniaVicente Jacksoncumulative traumasubject matter jurisdictioncontract of hireVought Aircraftoral employment contractservice credit
References
Case No. ADJ1298814
Regular
Mar 26, 2010

PAUL MATHENY vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CDCR-INMATE CLAIMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/ STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a January 6, 2010 decision. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and a preliminary review indicating the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The Board seeks a complete understanding of the record to issue a just decision. Pending this, all future communications must be filed with the Board's Office of the Commissioners.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationCDCR-INMATE CLAIMSlegally uninsuredSTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDSTATE CONTRACT SERVICESADJ1298814SBR 0335316Opinion and OrderDecision After Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. ADJ7683164
Regular
Jan 24, 2012

JACQUELIN RODRIGUEZ vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration in Jacquelin Rodriguez's case. They affirmed the original decision dated November 9, 2011. However, the Board amended the case caption. The applicant's employer, the Department of Social Services, was correctly identified as legally uninsured with State Compensation Insurance Fund as the adjusting agency.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantLegally UninsuredAdjusting AgencyReconsiderationWCJDecision After ReconsiderationAffirmAmendCaption
References
Case No. ADJ20774559
Regular
Oct 09, 2025

JOANNE JOHNSON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CA HIGHWAY PATROL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Petition for Removal, filed in relation to a decision issued on April 10, 2025, has been voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner. Due to this withdrawal, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has ordered the dismissal of the petition. Consequently, the Petition for Removal is formally dismissed. The decision was dated and filed at San Francisco, California on October 9, 2025.

Petition for RemovalWithdrawn PetitionDismissed PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCA Highway PatrolLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundAdjustedState Contract ServicesAdjudication Number
References
Case No. ADJ10351910
Regular
Aug 09, 2017

SELENA MCINTOSH vs. MILITARY DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, legally uninsured, adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns whether a California Army National Guard member injured during "active duty for training" under federal Title 10 is eligible for California workers' compensation benefits. The Board found that California Military and Veterans Code Section 340(b) expressly prohibits state workers' compensation benefits for service performed under Title 10. Therefore, the applicant cannot collect benefits under Division 4 of the Labor Code. While the applicant's VA benefits were denied, her recourse was to appeal that denial, not to pursue state workers' compensation.

Military Departmentlegally uninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundTitle 10Labor Code Division 4Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJpsyche injurysexual assault
References
Case No. ADJ360205 (LBO 0384980)
Regular
Aug 05, 2010

Gurdev Malhotra vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES FAIRVIEW; Legally Uninsured, CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's advisory opinion concerning permanent disability rating for grip loss. Defendant argued the WCJ erred by allowing rating for grip loss when range of motion was present, and that the QME's reports did not support grip loss rating. The Board rescinded the WCJ's findings, remanding the case for further proceedings to ensure the WCJ follows the established process for issuing rating instructions based on substantial medical evidence, as clarified in *Blackledge v. Bank of America*. The ultimate determination of permanent disability requires a proper QME opinion and subsequent rating instructions from the WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGurdev MalhotraState of California Department of Developmental ServicesLegally UninsuredContract ServicesPermanent Disability RatingGrip LossAMA GuidesQualified Medical EvaluatorQME
References
Showing 1-10 of 8,184 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