Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ1538813 [MON 0309956] ADJ3751110 [MON 0326164] ADJ1500144 [SAC 0290200] ADJ820065 [SAC 0352087]

Regular

Sep 18, 2008

Parvin Olfati, (Patty Olfati) vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, Legally Uninsured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND (Adjusting Agengy)

Petition for disqualification denied. Applicant's subjective perceptions of bias not well-founded.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationLabor Code section 5311WCAB rule 10452Administrative Law JudgeBiasHostilityDiscriminatory TreatmentDiscoveryPublic Records Act

References

Case No. ADJ10091554

Regular

Jun 24, 2019

GIUSEPPE MORICI vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of San Diego's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that the applicant sustained a compensable psychiatric injury. The judge determined the injury was predominantly caused by actual employment events, not lawful personnel actions or the applicant's subjective perceptions. The Board deferred to the judge's credibility determinations based on observed demeanor.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGiuseppe MoriciCounty of San Diegopsyche injurycompensablegood faith personnel actionssubjective misperceptionReport and RecommendationWCJ credibility determinationpreponderance of evidence

References

Case No. ADJ10333468

Regular

Nov 05, 2018

RHONDA DUNBAR HOWARD vs. VALLEY BULK TRANSPORT, NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition to disqualify the judge. The petition was dismissed because it was untimely, filed after the first witness was sworn, and lacked a required supporting affidavit detailing specific grounds for disqualification. Furthermore, the Board found that the defendant's allegations of prejudice were based on subjective perception and did not meet the legal standard for disqualification, even on the merits. Therefore, the judge's petition to disqualify was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationWCJ disqualificationLabor Code 132aAppeals Board Rule 10452untimely petitionprejudicejudicial biasCode of Civil Procedure section 641affidavit

References

Case No. ADJ234009 (OAK 0324352) ADJ3704382 (OAK 0335469)

Regular

Jan 12, 2010

Carole Young vs. IPC SECURITY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ABM adjusted by ESIS

The applicant sought removal and disqualification of the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) alleging bias due to denied trial requests, refusal to consider evidence, and case delays. The Appeals Board denied the removal and disqualification, stating a subjective perception of bias is insufficient grounds. The Board returned the case to the Presiding WCJ to address the defendant's request to declare the applicant a vexatious litigant, requiring notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardremovaldisqualificationworkers' compensation judge (WCJ)biasvexatious litigantPWCJWCAB Rule 10782applicantdefendant

References

Case No. ADJ969080 (FRE 0202793)

Regular

Sep 15, 2016

PEDRO LOPEZ vs. CAL-ALMOND; TRAVELERS

The applicant sought to disqualify the administrative law judge (WCJ) alleging insufficient time was spent on his case and a lack of seriousness towards his injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) found the petition lacked the required formal affidavit but considered its merits. The WCAB denied the petition, holding that a party's subjective perception of bias or disagreement with rulings does not constitute legal grounds for disqualification under relevant statutes. The Board also noted the applicant's separate request for disability accommodations for an upcoming hearing.

Disqualification PetitionWCJ BiasLabor Code 5311Code of Civil Procedure 641Unqualified OpinionLegal GroundsSubjective PerceptionWCAB Rule 10452Affirmative DutyJudicial Discretion

References

Case No. ADJ14178627

Regular

Feb 15, 2023

ELISANDRO CAMPOS vs. PRODESSE PROPERTY GROUP, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied applicant Elisandro Campos's petition to disqualify the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The Board found that the petition lacked specific facts, under penalty of perjury, to establish grounds for disqualification under Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641. Legal precedent dictates that conclusory allegations or subjective perceptions of bias are insufficient, and judicial expressions of opinion based on evidence do not constitute grounds for disqualification. The Board also admonished the applicant for filing duplicative and potentially frivolous pleadings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationWCJdisqualification groundsCode of Civil Procedure section 641unqualified opinionbiasenmityWCAB Rule 10960affidavit

References

Case No. ADJ9068768 (MF)

Regular

Sep 15, 2017

CHEILITA LANE vs. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

This case involves an applicant alleging cumulative trauma injury to her neck, shoulders, lower extremities, and a psychiatric injury due to her employment as a probation officer. The defendant sought reconsideration of the original award, challenging the applicant's credibility and the compensability of the psychiatric injury, arguing it stemmed from subjective perceptions rather than actual events. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the psychiatric injury finding based on substantial evidence and the WCJ's report. However, they amended the award to defer issues related to the orthopedic injury, medical treatment for it, and permanent disability, remanding the matter for further proceedings to develop the medical record regarding the orthopedic claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative TraumaPsychiatric InjuryOrthopedic InjuryQualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidencePermanent DisabilityMedical TreatmentPermanent and Stationary DateVocational Rehabilitation

References

Case No. ADJ11209389

Regular

Dec 03, 2018

CARLOTA FORBES vs. ESIS, INC.; ACE INSURANCE, administered by ESIS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal and dismissed their Petition for Disqualification. The defendant sought removal due to alleged procedural errors and bias by the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) following a mandatory settlement conference. The Board found the defendant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm necessary for removal. Furthermore, the Petition for Disqualification was dismissed for failing to meet procedural requirements, specifically the lack of a supporting affidavit under penalty of perjury detailing the grounds for disqualification. Even on the merits, the Board determined the defendant's claims of bias were based on subjective perceptions and did not meet the legal standard for disqualification.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ DevineMandatory Settlement ConferenceDue ProcessSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10452

References

Case No. ADJ8338903

Regular

Sep 19, 2016

IRMA DE LEON vs. SAFEWAY, INC.

This case concerns whether medical treatment provided within a Medical Provider Network (MPN) is subject to Utilization Review (UR) and Independent Medical Review (IMR). The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ, holding that MPN treatment is indeed subject to UR/IMR. Delays in IMR determinations do not invalidate them. The March 21, 2014 IMR determination was deemed binding as no grounds for appeal were established.

MPNUtilization ReviewIndependent Medical ReviewMedical Treatment Utilization ScheduleLabor Code section 4610Medical Provider NetworkRequest for AuthorizationDirectory vs. Mandatory Time PeriodMargarisSB 863

References

Case No. ADJ2445523 (SAL 0073199)

Regular

Jun 26, 2014

JUANITA NUNO vs. SAFEWAY, INC., Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Safeway's petition for reconsideration and removal concerning a finding about a potential surgical consult. The Board found the judge's finding was not a final order subject to reconsideration as it was prospective and contingent. Similarly, it was not an order or decision subject to removal because it did not definitively order any action or decide any rights. Safeway's argument that applicant's trust in a specific doctor was irrelevant was not addressed as the petition was dismissed on procedural grounds.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAmended Findings and OrderMedical Provider Network (MPN)Labor Code Section 4616Primary Treating PhysicianSurgical ConsultExpedited HearingDeclaration of Readiness to Proceed

References

Showing 1-10 of 517 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ1538813 [MON 0309956] ADJ3751110 [MON 0326164] ADJ1500144 [SAC 0290200] ADJ820065 [SAC 0352087]

Regular

Sep 18, 2008

Parvin Olfati, (Patty Olfati) vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, Legally Uninsured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND (Adjusting Agengy)

Petition for disqualification denied. Applicant's subjective perceptions of bias not well-founded.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationLabor Code section 5311WCAB rule 10452Administrative Law JudgeBiasHostilityDiscriminatory TreatmentDiscoveryPublic Records Act

References

Case No. ADJ10091554

Regular

Jun 24, 2019

GIUSEPPE MORICI vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

References

Case No. ADJ10333468

Regular

Nov 05, 2018

RHONDA DUNBAR HOWARD vs. VALLEY BULK TRANSPORT, NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE

References

Case No. ADJ234009 (OAK 0324352) ADJ3704382 (OAK 0335469)

Regular

Jan 12, 2010

Carole Young vs. IPC SECURITY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ABM adjusted by ESIS

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardremovaldisqualificationworkers' compensation judge (WCJ)biasvexatious litigantPWCJWCAB Rule 10782applicantdefendant

References

Case No. ADJ969080 (FRE 0202793)

Regular

Sep 15, 2016

PEDRO LOPEZ vs. CAL-ALMOND; TRAVELERS

Disqualification PetitionWCJ BiasLabor Code 5311Code of Civil Procedure 641Unqualified OpinionLegal GroundsSubjective PerceptionWCAB Rule 10452Affirmative DutyJudicial Discretion

References

Case No. ADJ14178627

Regular

Feb 15, 2023

ELISANDRO CAMPOS vs. PRODESSE PROPERTY GROUP, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationWCJdisqualification groundsCode of Civil Procedure section 641unqualified opinionbiasenmityWCAB Rule 10960affidavit

References

Case No. ADJ9068768 (MF)

Regular

Sep 15, 2017

CHEILITA LANE vs. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

References

Case No. ADJ11209389

Regular

Dec 03, 2018

CARLOTA FORBES vs. ESIS, INC.; ACE INSURANCE, administered by ESIS, INC.

References

Case No. ADJ8338903

Regular

Sep 19, 2016

IRMA DE LEON vs. SAFEWAY, INC.

References

Case No. ADJ2445523 (SAL 0073199)

Regular

Jun 26, 2014

JUANITA NUNO vs. SAFEWAY, INC., Permissibly Self-Insured

References

Showing 1-10 of 517 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.