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. ADJ6521131
Regular
Aug 11, 2010

MARTIN REYES vs. GERALD & BOBBY HUNT (Homeowners), CAPITOL INSURANCE

This case involves an applicant injured while tree trimming for homeowners. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, overturning the original decision. The Board found that because the applicant was an unlicensed contractor performing work requiring a license, he is considered an employee as a matter of law under Labor Code section 2750.5. However, the applicant is still excluded from workers' compensation coverage under Labor Code section 3352(h). Therefore, despite being an employee, the applicant takes nothing by way of his claim.

Labor Code section 2750.5Labor Code section 3352(h)unlicensed contractoremployee presumptionstatutory employerresidential dwellingtree trimmingBusiness and Professions Code section 7026.1Cedillo v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.independent contractor
References
Case No. ADJ2139644
Regular
Jan 19, 2011

JUAN MORALES vs. HASSEN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, MAJESTIC INSURANCE

This case involves a worker seeking increased benefits under Labor Code Section 4553 for serious and willful employer misconduct. The applicant alleged his employer authorized him to use heavy equipment, a Pettibone, for tree trimming, which resulted in his injury. However, the judge found no evidence of employer authorization or knowledge of the applicant's use of the Pettibone. Furthermore, the applicant's described method of using the equipment was deemed reckless, negating any employer expectation. Consequently, the Petition for Reconsideration was denied, upholding the original decision that the employer was not guilty of serious and willful misconduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code Section 4553Increased BenefitsPettiboneEmployer KnowledgeAuthorizationReckless Conduct
References
Case No. ADJ9170309
Regular
Nov 03, 2025

Miguel Mosqueda vs. City of Clearlake

Applicant Miguel Mosqueda sought reconsideration of a July 25, 2025 decision which found his injuries were not caused by the employer's serious and willful misconduct or violation of safety orders. Mosqueda, a maintenance worker, suffered catastrophic injuries, including paraplegia, after falling from a ladder while trimming a tree for the City of Clearlake. He contended that the employer violated several Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8 sections related to safety, training, and equipment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, adopting the WCJ's report, denied the petition for reconsideration, concluding that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct and that no alleged safety violation was the proximate cause of the accident.

Serious and willful misconductPetition for reconsiderationFindings and OrderViolation of statuteViolation of safety orderCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3203Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3276(d)(1)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3276(e)(15)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3421(b)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3421(d)
References
Case No. ADJ9835845
Regular
Oct 03, 2016

DELFINO RAMOS CRUZ vs. SEVENTH TREE TRIMMING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Delfino Ramos Cruz's Petition for Removal. The WCAB affirmed the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) report, finding that removal is an extraordinary remedy and is only granted for substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which was not demonstrated. The board concluded that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse decision is ultimately issued.

Petition for RemovalAppeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationextraordinary remedyCortez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10843(a)
References
Case No. ADJ843966 (SDO 0338705)
Regular
Dec 13, 2013

Reed Thomas Kirby vs. Arthur Gonzales, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, KEITH PATRICK DONNELLY, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to amend a prior award. The WCAB affirmed the finding that the applicant sustained an injury while employed as a tree trimmer by an uninsured employer, Keith Patrick Donnelly. However, the WCAB amended the award to reflect that liability rests solely with the uninsured employer, not the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF), as UEBTF's liability is derivative. The WCAB rejected arguments that the City of San Diego was also responsible and confirmed the applicant is entitled to benefits from Donnelly.

Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundUEBTFKeith Patrick DonnellyTarzan Tree SpecialistsArthur GonzalesState Farm Insurance Companytree trimmerderivative defendantLabor Code section 3352(h)City of San Diego
References
Case No. ADJ2003862
Regular
Feb 08, 2010

REYES DE SANTIAGO vs. DE SANTIAGO TREE SERVICE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves an applicant who sustained industrial injuries, including psychiatric harm, after falling from a tree while trimming it. The applicant had been employed for less than six months at the time of injury. The Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the case for a new decision because the applicant's fall, though sudden, was not considered an "extraordinary employment condition" under Labor Code section 3208.3(d). The majority found that the risk of falling is inherent and routine for a tree trimmer and therefore does not qualify for the exception to the six-month employment rule for psychiatric injuries.

WCABFindings and Award and Orderindustrial injurypsychiatric injuryLabor Code section 3208.3(d)sudden and extraordinary employment conditionQualified Medical Examinersubstantial evidencepermanent disabilityapportionment
References
Case No. ADJ850378 (OAK 0327145)
Regular
Jul 20, 2009

JUAN C. CAMPOS vs. EXPERT TREE SERVICE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an applicant injured while working as a tree climber, who sustained multiple physical injuries and sought compensation for a psychological injury. The defendant contested the psychological injury claim, arguing it didn't meet the "sudden and extraordinary employment condition" exception to the six-month employment rule for such claims. The Board granted reconsideration, reversing the finding of a compensable psychological injury because the event, while sudden, was not extraordinary for the nature of the employment. The case is remanded for a new rating of orthopedic permanent disability.

Labor Code section 3208.3sudden and extraordinary employment conditionpsychiatric injurypermanent disabilityAMA Guidessequelaecompensable consequenceindustrial injuryreconsiderationfindings award and order
References
Case No. ADJ9625293, ADJ9625295, ADJ9545692
Regular
Feb 22, 2016

JUAN MIRAMONTES vs. NATURE'S TREE SERVICE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant was an employee of Nature's Tree Service. This decision was based on the judge's credibility determination, which the Board gave great weight. The judge found ample evidence of employment, including direction from David Salas, wearing a company uniform, and using company vehicles. The Board concluded there was no substantial evidence to overturn the judge's findings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONWCJCREDIBILITY DETERMINATIONGARZANATURE'S TREE SERVICESTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDJUAN MIRAMONTESEMPLOYEEINDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
References
Case No. ADJ6650757
Regular
Nov 05, 2010

SANTOS BUENO vs. GOLDEN TREE HARVEST ENTERPRISES, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Santos Bueno, versus Golden Tree Harvest Enterprises and Zenith Insurance Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has issued an order denying reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB adopted the findings of the administrative law judge and found no basis to overturn the initial ruling. Therefore, the petitions for reconsideration have been officially denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSANTOS BUENOGOLDEN TREE HARVEST ENTERPRISESZENITH INSURANCE COMPANYADJ6650757San Fernando District OfficeORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATIONPetitions for Reconsiderationworkers' compensation administrative law judgedenial of reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ9778324
Regular
Nov 08, 2017

JAIRO RAMOS vs. JTS JOSE TREE SERVICE, INC., JOSE MIGUEL SOTO, DANIEL SOTO, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves a workers' compensation claim where the applicant sustained an admitted industrial injury. The primary issue is determining the identity of the employer(s), with allegations of joint ownership/operation between JTS Jose Tree Service, Inc., Jose Miguel Soto, and Daniel Soto. Jose Soto's petition for reconsideration was dismissed as untimely and procedurally deficient. Daniel Soto's petition was granted because the original findings lacked evidentiary support and the record required further development regarding employment status and potential licensing issues. The case is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardJTS Jose Tree ServiceJose Miguel SotoDaniel SotoUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundFindings of FactOrder of DeferralPetition for ReconsiderationJoint EmployersSubstantial Shareholder
References
Showing 1-10 of 53 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