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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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. ADJ6950787
Regular
Jun 22, 2012

JOSE BARRIENTOS vs. MARK GREENBERG, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued the administrative law judge (WCJ) abused discretion by finding the applicant credible, specifically regarding the duration of employment to exclude him from employee status under Labor Code §3352(h). The WCJ adopted the report recommending denial, emphasizing applicant's credible testimony regarding hours worked and pay, and finding the defendant's testimony less reliable due to a lack of direct knowledge. The Board extended great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, affirming the denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility findingLabor Code §3352(h)employee definitionconflicting testimonyobservational demeanorunreliable testimonyunrebutted testimony
References
Case No. ADJ8009793
Regular
Nov 07, 2013

FELICIANO BARRANDA, FAUSTINO BASABES vs. MIKE ETCHANDY FARIAS, INC.; STAR INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP

In this workers' compensation case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendants' petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB affirmed the finding that the applicants sustained injuries arising out of and in the course of employment, specifically applying the "required vehicle" exception to the going and coming rule. This exception was found applicable because the employer benefited incidentally from the use of applicant's private vehicle for transporting workers and tools between fields on the same day. The WCAB gave great weight to the Administrative Law Judge's credibility findings, particularly the testimony of applicant Feliciano Barranda.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAOE-COEGoing and Coming RuleRequired Vehicle ExceptionJoint Petition for ReconsiderationCredibility FindingSubstantial EvidenceSole Witness TestimonyEmployer Witness TestimonyApplicant Testimony
References
Case No. RIV 81540
Regular
Apr 25, 2008

LEONARD KOLAR vs. TMI PRODUCTS, INC., TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE

The Appeals Board granted removal because the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) erroneously excluded an employer's designated representative, who was also a witness, from the applicant's testimony. This exclusion prejudiced the defendant. The Board struck the applicant's testimony and returned the case for further proceedings, but declined to disqualify the WCJ.

Petition for RemovalEmployer RepresentativeWitness ExclusionEvidence Code Section 777Applicant TestimonyIndustrial InjuryLeft Shoulder InjuryLeft Upper ExtremityEmployer DenialPriority Conference
References
Case No. ADJ7692621; ADJ7687042
Regular
May 17, 2012

FREDDY TORRES vs. SCOTT BROS DAIRY INC.; ILLINOIS MIDWEST SPRINGFIELD

This case involves a dispute over the selection of a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The defendant attempted to strike a QME from the panel prematurely, violating Labor Code section 4062.2(c). The applicant's subsequent strike was timely, leaving only Dr. Katz on the panel. The Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the WCJ's order for an evaluation by Dr. Katz. The Board warned the defendant that denying benefits based on Dr. Katz's report would be at their peril.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluationLabor Code Section 4062.2(c)QME PanelAgreed Medical EvaluatorStrike a NameTimely StrikePremature StrikeMedical DirectorDivision of Workers' Compensation
References
Case No. ADJ9120742
Regular
May 11, 2016

CHRIS KING vs. SAN JOSE JOB CORPS, INSURANCE COMPANY STATE OF PA, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an award to the applicant, Chris King. The defendant argued the applicant's testimony was not credible due to discrepancies in medical records and reporting delays. However, the Board gave great weight to the Administrative Law Judge's credibility determination, which was supported by independent witness testimony corroborating the claimed injury during an MMA class. The Board found no substantial evidence to reject the judge's findings, affirming the original award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility determinationTrainee Employee Assistance Program SpecialistMixed Martial ArtsMMAneck injuryright shoulder injurydysphagia
References
Case No. ADJ8835727
Regular
Oct 05, 2015

ELVIRA MAYA vs. WENTE VINEYARDS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns the timeliness of a defendant's strike of a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel. The Appeals Board determined that the ten-day period to strike a QME from a panel, as per Labor Code section 4062.2(c), is extended by five days when service is by U.S. mail, consistent with Code of Civil Procedure section 1013(a). Consequently, the defendant's strike of Dr. Boyd was deemed timely, and the applicant must now be examined by the remaining panel member, Dr. Gardner. The prior WCJ decision finding the strike untimely was rescinded.

WCABReconsiderationRemovalPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationPQMEPanel QMELabor Code section 4062.2(c)Code of Civil Procedure section 1013(a)WCAB Rule 10507(a)(1)
References
Case No. ADJ8186548
Regular
Jan 10, 2014

JOSE GONZALEZ TORRES vs. GREAT WALL SEAFOOD CORPORATION, TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, CNA CLAIMS PLUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge. The applicant's claim was denied based on inconsistent testimony and a lack of credible evidence establishing an employment relationship. Defense witnesses, including the company's general manager and secretary, credibly testified that the applicant was not an employee on the date of the alleged injury. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility findings, which were supported by substantial evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.employee statusloader/unloaderinconsistent testimonydeposition testimonywitness testimony
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,154 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