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. ADJ7311200
Regular
Aug 03, 2017

What Happened in Felix vs. Weber Metals Reconsideration?

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration by defendant Wausau regarding an arbitrator's findings that applicant sustained industrial injury to his pulmonary system and upper extremities during a cumulative period. Wausau argued the claim was time-barred and that liability for upper extremity injury was improper. The Board denied Wausau's petition, finding Wausau failed to meet its burden of proof on the statute of limitations defense. The Board also determined that applicant properly amended his claim for upper extremities and that apportionment of liability based on days worked was appropriate.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCoast Crane CompanyEmployers Insurance of WausauThunder Machine WorksAIX Insurance CompanyAerotekAllegis Group Insurance Companycumulative injurypulmonary systemupper extremities
References
10
Case No. ADJ602790 (STK 0179563)
Regular
Jul 17, 2012

How Did the WCAB Rule in Hardgrove vs. Intercon Security?

This case involves Tracee Mawyer's workers' compensation claim against Gallo Glass Company for cumulative trauma injuries. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the trial judge's denial of injury to applicant's bilateral upper extremities, specifically carpal tunnel syndrome. The Board found Dr. Clayman's reports sufficiently supported an industrial injury to the upper extremities and awarded additional temporary disability for the period following carpal tunnel surgery. The case was returned for a new permanent disability rating for the upper extremity injuries.

Cumulative traumabilateral upper extremitiescarpal tunnel release surgerytemporary disabilitypermanent disability ratingreconsiderationDr. Claymanneck injuryshoulder injuryspine injury
References
0
Case No. 01-15-00374-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2015

What Did the WCAB Decide in Cuadra vs. Community Home Care?

This case involves an appeal filed by the National Wildlife Federation (Appellee) against the Upper Trinity Regional Water District and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Appellants). The appeal concerns the District Court's judgment of March 6, 2015, which reversed and remanded TCEQ's decision to grant Water Use Permit No. 5821 to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. The core issue is TCEQ's alleged failure to properly implement Texas Water Code Section 11.085 (l)(2), which requires stringent water conservation and efficiency for interbasin water transfers. The Appellee argues that TCEQ improperly relied on a voluntary guide (Report 362) instead of fulfilling legislative directives for robust conservation standards, and that the District's water conservation plan lacks adequate implementation and enforcement mechanisms, thus failing to meet the 'highest practicable levels of water conservation and efficiency achievable' as mandated by law.

Water ConservationInterbasin TransferEnvironmental LawAdministrative LawAppellate ReviewTexas Water CodeWater Use PermitDrought Contingency PlanRegulatory ComplianceBest Management Practices
References
25
Case No. ADJ8835660
Regular
Jan 19, 2018

How Were Death Benefits Handled in Bocanegra vs. Sun-Gro Commodities?

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration by the defendant regarding a permanent total disability award for Joe Casillas. The defendant argued against the total disability finding, questioned injury to the left upper extremity, and contested the basis for vocational rehabilitation findings. The Board granted reconsideration to amend the findings, rescinding the finding of injury to the left upper extremity due to the applicant unilaterally withdrawing that issue. However, the Board affirmed the permanent total disability finding based on substantial medical and vocational evidence, including the applicant's significant limitations in daily living and unsuitability for vocational rehabilitation, despite the absence of left upper extremity injury.

Permanent total disabilityvocational rehabilitationindustrial injurybilateral upper extremitiescervical spinepsychefabricatorState Compensation Insurance Fundpetition for reconsiderationadministrative law judge
References
3
Case No. ADJ10065069
Regular
May 16, 2018

Can a WCJ Be Disqualified for Appearance of Bias?

This case concerns defendant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) finding of injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to the applicant's right upper extremity. Defendant argued that no evidence supported injury to other alleged body parts and that the WCJ should have made findings on those parts instead of deferring the issue. The WCAB denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision to limit the trial to the threshold issue of right upper extremity injury AOE/COE. The WCAB found Dr. Amster's opinion constituted substantial evidence for the right upper extremity injury and that the WCJ acted within their authority by deferring other issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAOE/COEQualified Medical ExaminerReconsiderationCumulative TraumaRepetitive Strain InjuryPreexisting ConditionAggravationContributing CauseMandatory Settlement Conference
References
7
Case No. ADJ10798774 (Master File); ADJ10798775
Regular
Jul 21, 2025

What Were the Key Rulings in Torrez vs. SuperShuttle?

Applicant Willk Marilao sought reconsideration of a Joint Findings of Fact and Award (F&A) concerning industrial injuries to his upper and lower extremities. The F&A found 64% permanent partial disability for upper extremities and 23% for lower extremities. Applicant contended that he was 100% permanently and totally disabled and that apportionment was improper. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the F&A, and returned the matter for further proceedings, finding the original findings of specific injuries unsupported by substantial medical evidence, and medical opinions on apportionment to be speculative.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings of Fact and AwardIndustrial InjuryBilateral Upper ExtremitiesCarpal Tunnel SyndromePermanent Partial DisabilityApportionmentVocational ExpertPermanently and Totally Disabled
References
27
Case No. ADJ7658097
Regular
Aug 14, 2017

Why Was Removal Denied in Rush vs. California Correctional Institution?

This case involves an applicant who claimed injury to multiple body parts, including upper extremities, back, neck, abdomen (hernia), and lower extremities. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the original findings, except they specifically ruled against injury to the applicant's upper extremities based on the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion. The WCAB also clarified that temporary disability benefits should commence from September 14, 2010, the date of hernia repair surgery, and deferred the determination of the exact date of injury for the cumulative trauma. The court also upheld the applicant's average weekly earnings determination, finding the applicant's testimony and records credible and unrebutted.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)temporary disability indemnitydate of injurycumulative traumahernia repairpulmonary embolism
References
5
Case No. ADJ6581535
Regular
Nov 15, 2017

What Did the WCAB Clarify in Ontiveros vs. Savers Stores?

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Angel Mendez's petition for reconsideration. Mendez sought a finding of $100\%$ permanent disability, arguing total loss of use of his dominant right upper extremity. The Board affirmed the WCJ's prior award of $75\%$ permanent disability, finding no presumption of total disability for the loss of use of only one hand. The evidence did not support a finding of total loss of use of the upper extremity.

Petition for ReconsiderationPermanent Disability ApportionmentVocational EvidenceDominant Upper ExtremityLoss of UsePresumption of Permanent Total DisabilityLabor Code Section 4662(a)(2)Substantial EvidenceLeBoeuf v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Dairy Worker
References
1
Case No. ADJ105804 (ANA 0388145)
Regular
Jul 20, 2012

Why Was Reconsideration Denied in Gomez vs. Dorothy Stevens?

This case involves a fire captain's claim for industrial injury to his upper extremities, specifically bilateral carpal tunnel and canal of Guyon entrapments. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the previous award, finding insufficient evidence to support industrial causation for these specific upper extremity injuries. The WCAB remanded the case for further development of the record, as medical reports did not definitively link the conditions to his employment. The determination of permanent disability and apportionment for these issues remains deferred pending further medical evaluation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryFire CaptainUpper ExtremitiesCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCanal of Guyon EntrapmentBilateral EntrapmentIndustrial CausationAgreed Medical EvaluatorOrthopedist
References
5
Case No. ADJ8415183
Regular
Apr 27, 2015

Why Was Reconsideration Dismissed in Sabino vs. Johnson Pump Company?

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to correct a technical rating error in the applicant's permanent disability award. The Board affirmed the original finding that the applicant, a firefighter, sustained industrial injuries to his bilateral upper extremities and heart. However, the permanent disability rating was adjusted from 71% to 70% due to the correction of a specific rating modifier. The Board also found that the orthopedic Agreed Medical Evaluator's use of grip loss to rate the applicant's upper extremity impairment was supported by substantial evidence.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityFirefighterBilateral Upper ExtremitiesHeart HypertensionAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Orthopedic AMEInternal Medicine AME
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 509 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