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. ADJ1479326 (ANA 0411799) ADJ7233578
Regular
Oct 07, 2014

JONATHAN DUONG vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board overturned a WCJ's decision to exclude sub rosa surveillance video. The Board found no legal basis for excluding the video obtained in a mobile home park parking lot and a grocery store, as the applicant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in those public areas. The Board determined that the defendant would suffer significant prejudice from the exclusion, justifying removal of the case. Therefore, the sub rosa video was ruled admissible and may be provided to medical evaluators.

Sub rosa videoremovalreconsiderationadmissibilityinvasion of privacyreasonable expectation of privacycivil liabilityworkers' compensation fraudmedical-legal evaluatorworkers' compensation appeals board
References
Case No. ADJ1646469 (VNO 0550706)
Regular
Apr 19, 2013

ANDREW HERNANDEZ vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an award for industrial injury to the applicant's low back and cervical spine. The defendant argued the applicant was not temporarily disabled as they offered a modified position consistent with AME Dr. Sew Hoy's restrictions, and that sub rosa videos should have been admitted. The Board denied reconsideration, finding Dr. Sew Hoy's report was qualified and did not preclude temporary disability, especially when contrasted with the applicant's treating physician's consistent findings. The Board also upheld the exclusion of the sub rosa videos due to late disclosure, as required by Labor Code section 5502(d)(3).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAndrew HernandezState Compensation Insurance FundFindings and Awardindustrial injurylow backcervical spinetemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityfuture medical treatment
References
Case No. ADJ387595 (VNO 0552648)
Regular
Jul 12, 2016

JOEL CARDENAS vs. ML ELECTRIC WORKS, INC, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, modifying a prior order by an administrative law judge. The Board removed the issues of penalty, costs, and sanctions related to the disclosure of sub rosa video and surveillance logs from trial consideration. However, the Board affirmed the remainder of the judge's order, which had compelled the defendant to serve the sub rosa materials and produce the claims adjuster and documents at trial. This decision aimed to prevent further discovery beyond the mandatory settlement conference cutoff while still requiring disclosure of the surveillance evidence.

Sub rosa videoPetition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery cut-offDue processIrreparable harmClaims adjusterLabor Code section 5502(d)(3)PenaltySanctions
References
Case No. ADJ924734 (MON 0299710)
Regular
Feb 07, 2014

VARDAN ESSAIAN vs. CAD FABULOUS, INC., STATE FARM CALIFORNIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an award of 100% permanent disability, finding the evidence did not justify an unapportioned award. The Board cited concerns regarding the apportionment of psychiatric disability and the impact of sub rosa video evidence on the applicant's claimed limitations. The case is remanded for further development of the record, specifically regarding the psychiatric AME's apportionment reasoning and the vocational experts' conclusions in light of the video evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAmended Findings of Fact and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentCumulative TraumaAgreed Medical ExaminerPsychiatryOrthopedicsSub Rosa Video
References
Case No. ADJ5825581, ADJ9590533
Regular
Apr 13, 2015

ALBERT WAN vs. COMMUNITY HEALTH NETWORK (SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both the applicant's and defendant's petitions, affirming the trial judge's order. The Board found the defendant violated Labor Code Section 4062.3 by failing to serve sub rosa surveillance video on the applicant 20 days before providing it to the QME, resulting in the testimony and video being stricken. While the applicant sought attorney's fees for this violation, the Board found the conduct was a failure to serve information, not a prohibited "communication" under the statute, thus precluding mandatory attorney's fees under that section. However, the Board admonished defendant's counsel for discovery abuses and allowed the possibility of sanctions under Labor Code Section 5813 if bad faith is found.

Sub rosa videoLabor Code section 4062.3Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)depositiondiscovery violationpetition for removalpetition for reconsiderationattorney's feessanctionsDWC Rule 35
References
Case No. ADJ1283096 (LAO 0806679) ADJ1113634 (LAO 0881381) ADJ906561 (LAO 0850434) ADJ2972268 (LAO 0806680)
Regular
Nov 08, 2010

MARIA AGUIRRE vs. BEST FOODS BAKING COMPANY / CPC, TRAVELERS DIAMOND BAR

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding the medical evidence regarding apportionment of permanent disability was insufficient. The WCJ must develop the medical record regarding causation and apportionment, distinguishing between injury and disability. The Board also affirmed the exclusion of the sub rosa video as untimely obtained. The cases are returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

ApportionmentChronic Pain SyndromeAgreed Medical ExaminerSub Rosa VideoCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryVocational RehabilitationFindings and AwardReconsiderationDiscovery
References
Case No. ADJ6970400
Regular
Jun 25, 2019

BETHANY NYBAKKEN vs. LANCASTER SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to formally admit the defendant's *sub rosa* video and specific exhibits into evidence, as initially intended by the judge. Despite the defendant's arguments regarding fraud, outdated medical evidence, and inadequate vocational testimony, the Board affirmed the judge's finding of permanent total disability. The Board accorded significant weight to the judge's credibility assessment of the applicant. The defendant's supplemental brief was rejected for procedural reasons.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent Total DisabilitySub Rosa VideoAdmissibility of EvidenceCredibility DeterminationObsolete Medical EvidenceApportionmentVocational Expert
References
Case No. ADJ9776323
Regular
Feb 11, 2016

VICTORIA PIAZZA vs. O'DELL PRINTING COMPANY, OAK RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior decision, and returned the case to the trial level. The prior decision, which found no temporary or permanent disability and no need for further medical treatment, was based on a Qualified Medical Examiner's opinion. This opinion was deemed not substantial evidence because the PQME mistook the applicant's mother for the applicant in a sub rosa video, leading to a flawed assessment of her disability. The WCJ agreed the error necessitated clarification and further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderQualified Medical ExaminerSub Rosa VideoSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionIndustrial InjuryTemporary DisabilityPermanent Disability
References
Case No. ADJ16131890
Regular
Oct 13, 2025

VERONICA JIMENEZ vs. ABM INDUSTRIES, ESIS CHATSWORTH

The applicant, Veronica Jimenez, sought reconsideration of a June 20, 2025 Findings of Fact and Award which found injuries to several body parts but not to the psyche or insomnia. Applicant contended that the QME report was not substantial medical evidence, proposed exhibits were excluded, and a sub rosa video should be stricken. The Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration and issued a Notice of Intention to rescind the arbitrator's decision, citing issues with the completeness of the arbitration record and due process concerns.

Carve-out casesPetition for reconsiderationSubstantial medical evidenceSub rosa videoAuthenticationReport on reconsiderationElectronic Adjudication Management SystemLabor Code section 5909TimelinessNotice of transmission
References
Case No. ADJ7944187
Regular
Feb 19, 2014

LISA MENDOZA vs. RITE AID CORPORATION, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The defendant, Rite Aid Corporation, petitioned for removal after the WCJ quashed a deposition and set an unreasonably short deadline for a vocational evaluation. The Appeals Board granted the petition, finding merit in the defendant's arguments regarding discovery limitations. The Board amended the prior orders, keeping discovery open for the vocational evaluator's report and depositions of qualified medical evaluators. This allows the defendant to fully pursue its discovery related to impairment, apportionment, and recent sub rosa video evidence.

Petition for RemovalVocational Rehabilitation AssessmentQuashed DepositionPermanent ImpairmentApportionmentSub Rosa VideoQualified Medical EvaluatorsIra CohenDiscoveryWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Showing 1-10 of 265 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