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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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. ADJ1973537 (SRO 0141664)
Regular
Jun 24, 2019

KENT WARD vs. TIMEC COMPANY, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of an arbitration decision that found his employer, Timec, 25% comparatively negligent for his injury, reducing Timec's credit from a third-party settlement. The applicant argued for a higher employer negligence percentage to increase his potential workers' compensation benefits. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the Arbitrator's findings and reasoning. The Board found the applicant failed to present evidence to overcome the Arbitrator's negligence determination.

Third-party creditComparative negligenceArbitrator's findingsPetition for reconsiderationLabor Code section 3861Employer's liabilityThird-party claim valueNet settlement amountCredit against workers' compensationEmployer's breach of duty
References
Case No. ADJ7741805
Regular
Sep 08, 2015

IRAIS REYES vs. ROYAL CATERING COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The defendant sought to dismiss the case based on res judicata and retraxit due to a prior civil settlement, and also identified a clerical error in the third-party credit calculation. The WCJ recommended denial, asserting that employment was previously determined and the civil dismissal did not preclude the current claim. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to amend the award to correct the calculation of the third-party credit, affirming the original award in all other respects. The amended credit reflects the applicant's net civil recovery less employer negligence.

AOE/COEFindings and Awardpermanent total disabilitythird party creditemployer negligenceres judicataretraxitcollateral estoppelstipulated third party creditcivil lawsuit
References
Case No. MON 0290566
Regular
Aug 12, 2008

MARTHA MANRIQUEZ vs. DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER/DEPARTMENT OF WATER & POWER

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's findings that the defendant unreasonably delayed paying a stipulated award, thus incurring penalties and attorney's fees. The Board affirmed the judge's decision to limit the defendant's credit for a third-party settlement to prospective benefits due to the defendant's inaction in pursuing its credit rights after the stipulated award. Furthermore, the Board ruled that the defendant could not apply its third-party credit against the penalties and attorney's fees awarded.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMartha ManriquezDepartment of Water and PowerLabor Code sections 4650(b)58145814.5Supplemental Findings and AwardPetition for Reconsiderationcumulative traumathird-party settlement
References
Case No. ADJ7479989
Regular
Dec 18, 2015

CARMEN ANDRADE vs. VISITING NURSE & HOSPICE CARE SANTA BARBARA, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision that allowed the defendant a credit against her workers' compensation award for her full third-party settlement recovery. The applicant argued the credit should be limited to her net recovery of $2,449.62. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to prove resolution of the defendant's credit rights. The Board amended the decision to defer the exact credit amount, remanding for further proceedings to determine its value. The September 29, 2015 decision was otherwise affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderThird Party CreditNet RecoveryLabor Code Section 3861Industrial InjuryCompromise and ReleaseLien ClaimEmployer Negligence
References
Case No. ADJ8410804
Regular
Jan 10, 2017

RAMIRO GONZALEZ vs. Mc CALL'S NURSERIES, INC., HORTICA INSURANCE & EMPLOYEES BENEFITS

This case involves an applicant seeking workers' compensation after an industrial injury, who also filed a third-party civil suit. Initially, the parties stipulated there was no employer negligence, but the applicant later sought to withdraw this stipulation after discovering new evidence relevant to employer fault. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding that the Administrative Law Judge acted within their authority to allow the issues of employer negligence and third-party credit to be added for trial, as these are intertwined and the defendant failed to show substantial prejudice from this procedural step. Removal is an extraordinary remedy, and the Board concluded that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if the defendant ultimately prevails on these issues.

Petition for RemovalThird Party CreditEmployer NegligenceLabor Code Section 5313Labor Code Section 5702Good CauseStipulationPre-trial Conference StatementMandatory Settlement ConferenceThird Party Civil Suit
References
Case No. ADJ4713554
Regular
Oct 19, 2010

JULIAN ARVIZU vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO

The Appeals Board rescinded the original award due to a factual error regarding the calculation of temporary disability indemnity and its interaction with Labor Code section 4656(c)(1). The case is remanded for the WCJ to re-determine the correct amount of the third-party credit and the overpayment of temporary disability indemnity. Crucially, any credit for overpayment of temporary disability indemnity must be applied before the third-party recovery credit to avoid double recovery. The WCJ must also reconsider whether credit against future medical treatment is appropriate based on case law.

Third-party recoverycredittemporary disability indemnityoverpaymentfuture medical treatmentLabor Code section 4850Labor Code section 4656(c)(1)permanent and stationary dateAgreed Medical Examinerrescinded decision
References
Case No. ADJ8762614
Regular
May 04, 2018

MICHAEL RUSSELL vs. INTERNATIONAL PAPER CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and deferred the issue of the third-party credit in this case. While affirming the finding of serious and willful misconduct by the employer, the Board found the original calculation of the third-party credit was unclear and did not follow established legal precedent. The case is remanded to the trial level to properly determine the third-party credit consistent with the *Martinez* decision. This will involve a detailed analysis of the fault of the employer, employee, and third party.

Petition for ReconsiderationSerious and Willful MisconductThird Party CreditMartinez v. Associated EngineeringComparative NegligenceEmployer NegligenceEmployee NegligenceApportionment of FaultPermanent DisabilityTemporary Disability
References
Case No. ADJ3904838 (LBO 0377238)
Regular
Jun 20, 2015

EDWARD MORSE vs. CONWAY WESTERN EXPRESS, INDEMNITY INSURANCE, CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICE COMPANY

This case involves cross-petitions for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision regarding an injured truck driver. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition to correct a clerical error, increasing the third-party credit from $179,001.50 to $199,001.50. The Board denied the applicant's petition regarding penalties for failure to provide medical treatment, deferring the issue until the application of the credit is determined. The original decision found the applicant sustained industrial injuries to multiple body parts and systems and awarded penalties against the defendant were not warranted.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryTruck DriverNeck InjuryBack InjuryShoulder InjuryKnee InjuryUpper Extremity Injury
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,098 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