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. ADJ7264915
Regular
Jul 15, 2013

ANA GONZALES vs. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

This case involves an applicant who sustained industrial psychiatric injury but whose orthopedic claims were denied due to insufficient medical evidence. The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to present substantial medical evidence of industrial causation for her orthopedic complaints. A dissenting commissioner argued that the primary medical evaluator's report was deficient and lacked substantial evidence, warranting further development of the record on orthopedic injuries and other claims. The dissent emphasizes the Board's duty to ensure substantial justice, suggesting it should have ordered further investigation on the denied orthopedic issues.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Orderindustrial injurypsychelow backneckright shoulderright wristright elbow
References
Case No. ADJ6937895
Regular
Jan 29, 2014

OSVALDO CALLEROS vs. EL CHOLO CAFÉ, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an order dismissing a lien claimant's lien. Although the lien claimant missed a conference and filed an objection late, the Board found that the treatment was authorized by the defendant and that returning the matter to the trial level would achieve substantial justice. The Board emphasized the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits, and that returning the case would allow for fair and equitable resolution without substantial prejudice to the defendant.

Lien ClaimantReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienEquitableUnjust EnrichmentAuthorized TreatmentLien ConferenceNotice of Intention to DismissObjectionSubstantial Justice
References
Case No. ADJ3501807 (SRO 0141934)
Regular
Sep 08, 2011

JESSICA REYNOLDS vs. AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal seeking to replace a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The defendant argued the QME violated Administrative Director Rule 34(b) by scheduling an exam at an unlisted address. However, the Board found the defendant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm necessary for removal. The Board agreed with the WCJ's finding that the objection appeared to be an attempt at "doctor shopping" and gamesmanship, contrary to the policy of substantial justice.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorReplacement Panel QMELabor Code section 4062.2Administrative Director Rule 34(b)substantial prejudiceirreparable harmdoctor shoppinggamesmanshipsocial public policy
References
Case No. ADJ7282444
Regular
Aug 19, 2015

ROSA RANGEL vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, IN HOME SUPPORT SERVICES

The California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the judge's decision to set the case for trial. Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant failed to demonstrate such harm or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. The WCJ properly deferred the issue of medical record development to the trial judge.

Removal PetitionExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsideration Adequate RemedyWCJ ReportAgreed Medical EvaluationQualified Medical EvaluatorDevelop the RecordMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ6579284
Regular
Oct 09, 2025

Paul Smith III vs. Denver Broncos Football, Great Divide Insurance Company

The Denver Broncos Football filed a petition for removal contesting a joinder order issued by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition, the applicant's answer, and the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. The Board denied the petition for removal, emphasizing that removal is an extraordinary remedy. It concluded that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would not be an inadequate remedy if an adverse final decision were to be issued.

Petition for RemovalOrder of JoinderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdmitted EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceHolmberg
References
Case No. ADJ9958753 ADJ9958758
Regular
Jul 29, 2019

Raul Medrano vs. Stalwork, Inc., Everest National Insurance Co., American Claims Management, Inc., State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves a workers' compensation claim for injuries sustained by a carpenter. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found no substantial medical evidence and ordered the record to be developed. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, overruled the defendant's objection to applicant's exhibits to allow the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) to review them, and affirmed the order for further record development. The Board found this necessary to ensure substantial justice and allow the QME to review critical medical records for proper adjudication.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJAOE/COEQMESubstantial Medical EvidenceDevelop the RecordAdmissibility of ExhibitsMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. SFO 0484956
Regular
Dec 10, 2007

LEANNE TAM vs. FAIRMONT HOTEL, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

This case concerns a lien claimant's attempt to testify at trial regarding the reasonableness of medical treatment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the claimant's petition for removal, upholding the administrative law judge's decision to strike the witness. The Board reasoned that workers' compensation proceedings favor written medical reports over live testimony to ensure efficiency and substantial justice.

Petition for RemovalLien ClaimantTestimonyMandatory Settlement ConferenceWCAB Rule 10606Medical ReportsDirect ExaminationGood CauseSubstantial JusticeDue Process
References
Case No. ADJ10590233
Regular
Apr 29, 2019

MARTIN VASQUEZ vs. CR LAURENCE COMPANY, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Liberty Mutual's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's award to applicant Martin Vasquez. Defendant argued the judge improperly admitted medical reports not disclosed at the mandatory settlement conference. However, the Board found that a properly disclosed supplemental report effectively incorporated the unlisted permanent and stationary report, negating surprise or prejudice. Therefore, the Board concluded that admitting the incorporated report was consistent with substantial justice.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ Findings of FactAward and OrdersIndustrial InjuryLeft Knee InjuryTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityPrimary Treating PhysicianMedical OpinionMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ10160818; ADJ1459849
Regular
Oct 27, 2025

PHILIP SCHULTZ vs. SAITEK INDUSTRIES, LTD.; CIGA

This case involves Philip Schultz, who filed an application for adjudication claiming a back injury. Travelers Indemnity Company (Travelers) sought reconsideration of a prior Appeals Board decision that erroneously identified Travelers as the workers' compensation carrier for Saitek Industries, Ltd. in 2001, despite Travelers having been dismissed from the case due to lack of coverage. The Appeals Board granted Travelers' petition for reconsideration, acknowledging its constitutional mandate to ensure substantial justice and correct clerical errors. The Board issued a notice of intention to amend its December 4, 2023 decision to strike the erroneous Finding 2, which incorrectly attributed coverage to Travelers.

Petition for ReconsiderationClerical ErrorWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeclaraton of ReadinessCompromise and ReleaseCumulative InjurySubstantial JusticeDue ProcessNotice and Opportunity to Be HeardJurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,374 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