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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings.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
Case No. ADJ8603115
Regular
Aug 15, 2013

Laverne Maliga vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City and County of San Francisco's petition for reconsideration of an award to Laverne Maliga. The applicant, a firefighter, sustained an injury while attending a trench rescue training class offered through a federal grant program. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found the injury arose out of and in the course of employment because the Fire Department encouraged participation in such training for skill development and public protection. The judge distinguished this case from similar ones by noting the employer's active encouragement and provision of opportunities for the training.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity and County of San FranciscoPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactCourse of EmploymentTrench Rescue TrainingSan Francisco Fire DepartmentHomeland Security GrantOff-Duty StatusProfessional Development
References
Case No. ADJ4628737
Regular
Mar 08, 2010

FREDDIE HENSON vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of Fresno's petition for reconsideration, affirming the finding that Freddie Henson sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The Board found that Henson's training, though part of a university program, was directly beneficial to his role as a reserve deputy sheriff and was impliedly authorized by the County. The injury occurred during a training scenario, exposing him to dangers inherent in his employment as a law enforcement officer. Therefore, the Board concluded Henson was acting within the course of his employment when injured.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReserve Deputy SheriffCriminology 108Fresno StateAOE/COEcourse of employmentimpliedly authorizeddirect benefitjob functionstraining scenario
References
Case No. ADJ6408456
Regular
May 17, 2010

KENNETH M. HOOVER vs. CITY OF POMONA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's award of 100% permanent total disability. The Board found that the WCJ's decision was not supported by substantial evidence, primarily due to deficiencies in Dr. Grodan's medical reporting regarding the applicant's skin and cardiovascular conditions. The matter was returned to the trial level for further development of the record and a new decision. The Board confirmed the application of the 1997 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule and the admission of Dr. Shirman's report.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADJ6408456KENNETH M. HOOVERCITY OF POMONAreconsiderationFindings and Award and Orderworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJMay 172010
References
Case No. ADJ7671812
Regular
May 06, 2013

JONATHAN SOFER vs. SIMARO LIMOUSINE; A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; ALEXANDER OBUKJOVSKY INVIVIDUALLY AND AS THE SUBSTANTIAL SHAREHOLDER OF SIMARO, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant was an employee, not an independent contractor, on the date of injury. The Board deferred to the judge's credibility findings and adopted their report which detailed evidence of employer control. This evidence included provided training, the employer owning and insuring the vehicle, and dictating job pricing. The judge found the applicant's apparent freedom to choose routes and schedules to be illusory given the obligation to meet client demands without delay.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationApplicantDefendantIndependent ContractorEmployeeControl of BusinessTrainingCredibilitySimaro Limousine
References
Case No. ADJ6983222
Regular
Aug 21, 2012

ELAINE DONLIN vs. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., LIBERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the employer's petition for reconsideration, rescinding the previous award of increased compensation for serious and willful misconduct. The Board found insufficient evidence that the employer knew of a dangerous condition and deliberately failed to act, which is required to prove serious and willful misconduct. While the injury may have involved negligence, it did not rise to the level of quasi-criminal conduct necessary for an enhanced award. Therefore, the applicant was awarded nothing further beyond the resolved underlying claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code section 4553Findings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationVariable Height Extendo (VHE)Crush InjuryPermanent DisabilityGross NegligenceTraining Deficiencies
References
Case No. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a denial of workers' compensation benefits, which was based on the finding that his claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board affirmed the denial, concluding that the applicant's job abandonment led to a termination prior to the filing of his claims. The Board also determined that the employer properly denied both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating a presumption of compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeApplicantDefendantRalphs Grocery CompanySecurity GuardIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ7326084, ADJ7326039
Regular
May 10, 2013

THERESA GONZALES vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior order that assigned the applicant an Occupational Group Number (OGN) of 251. The applicant, a Senior Special Investigator handling child abuse cases, argued her duties warranted a higher OGN due to integral law enforcement training and the potential for dangerous situations. The Board agreed that while not a sworn police officer (OGN 490), her quasi-law enforcement duties and required training placed her more appropriately in Group 390 (Security Officer), rescinding the prior finding and returning the case for further proceedings.

Occupational Group NumberSenior Special InvestigatorLaw enforcement trainingIntegral part of occupationSecurity OfficerPolice OfficerSworn officersPermanent Disabilities Rating ScheduleReconsiderationJoint Findings and Order
References
Case No. ADJ10204439
Regular
Sep 02, 2016

JEFF SMITH vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of Riverside's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that Deputy Sheriff Jeff Smith's injury, sustained en route to mandatory employer-ordered training, fell under the "special mission" exception to the "going and coming rule." The training's deviation in location, time, and nature from Smith's regular duties satisfied the three-part test for a special mission. Therefore, Smith's injury was deemed to have arisen out of and occurred in the course of employment.

going and coming rulespecial mission exceptionspecial errand exceptionDeputy Sherifftraffic investigation classBen Clark Training Centermotor vehicle accidentcourse of employmentroutine dutiesemployer's benefit
References
Showing 1-10 of 344 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

ยฉ 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational