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. ADJ7162019
Regular
Aug 13, 2010

Abraham Avila vs. Victory Outreach San Bernardino, Guide One Ins. Co.

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendant, Victory Outreach San Bernardino, and its insurer, Guide One Ins. Co. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted this petition. The Board determined that reconsideration is necessary to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. Further proceedings may be held pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationVICTORY OUTREACH SAN BERNARDINOGUIDE ONE INS. CO.ABRAHAM AVILAOPINION AND ORDERGRANTING PETITIONSTATUTORY TIME CONSTRAINTSFACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUESJUST AND REASONED DECISION
References
0
Case No. ADJ3362574
Regular
Oct 18, 2012

LAURA BIGGS vs. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Laura Biggs' Petition for Reconsideration in this case against San Bernardino County Medical Center and San Bernardino County. The dismissal was based on the WCAB's review of the record and adoption of the administrative law judge's report and recommendation. The report provided the reasoning for the dismissal, which the WCAB incorporated by reference. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was officially dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalReport and RecommendationAdministrative Law JudgeSan Bernardino County Medical CenterLaura BiggsWorkers' Compensation CaseLegal DocumentCase Number
References
0
Case No. ADJ6720899
Regular
May 15, 2012

MELISSA ROSAS vs. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of San Bernardino Police Department's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found the applicant, Melissa Rosas, sustained a compensable injury in the form of cancer. This decision was based on the applicant being a police officer exposed to known carcinogens and the presumption under Labor Code § 3212.1 not being rebutted by the defense. The judge found the applicant's treating physician's opinion on variable cancer latency periods more persuasive than the defense expert's.

Labor Code § 3212.1cancer presumptionpolice officercarcinogen exposurebenzenecigarette smokegasoline fumesauto accidentsvehicle firesresidence fires
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

San Antonio Building & Construction Trades Council v. City of San Antonio

The San Antonio Building and Construction Trades Council (SABTC) and individual representatives challenged the City of San Antonio regarding prevailing wage requirements for construction workers on a convention center hotel project. SABTC argued that Chapter 2258 of the Texas Government Code mandated prevailing wages, but the trial court denied this, finding that despite being a 'public work', no 'public funds' were used for its construction. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment. It determined that public funds pledged as security for revenue bonds, or the bonds themselves, did not constitute public funds used for the 'construction' of the project under the relevant statute.

Prevailing Wage LawPublic WorksPublic FundsAssociational StandingLabor LawDeclaratory JudgmentTexas Government CodeRevenue BondsHotel Occupancy TaxStatutory Interpretation
References
16
Case No. 15-25-00093-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 19, 2025

State of Texas v. City of San Antonio, Ron Niremberg, in His Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of San Antonio, and Erik Walsh, in His Official Capacity as City Manager of the City of San Antonio

The State sued the City of San Antonio, its Mayor, and its City Manager for ultra vires conduct under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, seeking declarations that the City’s plan to spend taxpayer dollars on travel for out-of-state abortions violates the Texas Constitution’s Gift Clause. The district court granted the City’s plea to the jurisdiction, asserting the claim was not ripe, and dismissed the suit. The State argues that the City’s plan to fund out-of-state abortion travel violates the Gift Clause by lacking public benefit, failing to serve a public purpose, and not retaining public control over funds. The State contends that delaying judicial review would cause great hardship due to the imminent risk of constitutional injury from the disbursement of funds, which the City intended to expedite before SB 33's effective date or by the end of its fiscal year. The State asserts the case is ripe for review because the illegal activity is "likely to occur," and despite SB 33 prohibiting such funding, the City's belief it can disburse funds by September 30, 2025, keeps the controversy live.

Public Funds MisuseAbortion Travel FundingTexas Gift ClauseRipeness DoctrineUltra Vires ActConstitutional ChallengeState-City ConflictReproductive Rights PolicyTaxpayer MoneyInjunctive Relief
References
89
Case No. ADJ7324170 ADJ9797150
Regular
Apr 19, 2016

BEVERLY BOLTON vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant County of San Bernardino's petition for reconsideration of a January 29, 2016 decision. The WCAB requires further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future correspondence related to this reconsideration must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not with any district office or via e-filing. Any proposed settlements must be promptly communicated to the WCAB, as trial judges cannot act on them while reconsideration is pending.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)WCJProposed SettlementRules of the Administrative Director
References
0
Case No. 04-11-00402-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2012

City of San Antonio, and Its Agent, San Antonio Water System v. Albert Kevin Martin, A/K/A Kevin Martin

Albert Kevin Martin filed a whistleblower action against his former employer, San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and the City of San Antonio, alleging constructive discharge after reporting asbestos pipe disposal concerns to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). A jury initially found in Martin's favor, but SAWS appealed, disputing the causal link between Martin's report and his constructive discharge, and challenging the compensatory damages award. The appellate court affirmed the jury's finding of causation, concluding that SAWS's adverse actions were linked to Martin's whistleblowing, despite SAWS's alternative explanations. However, the court determined there was legally insufficient evidence to support the jury's award for past and future compensatory damages, particularly regarding mental anguish and chest pains, as the evidence presented did not meet the required legal standards for establishing such damages. Consequently, the appellate judgment was "AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED," deleting all references to compensatory damages from the trial court's judgment.

WhistleblowerConstructive DischargeRetaliationAsbestosEnvironmental ComplaintTCEQCausationCompensatory DamagesMental AnguishLegal Sufficiency
References
19
Case No. 04-14-00451-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2014

Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc. v. City of Public Service Board of San Antonio, a Municipal Board of the City of San Antonio

Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc. appealed an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction on its attorney's fees claim in a breach of contract suit against the City of San Antonio acting through the City Public Service Board (CPS). The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, affirmed the trial court's decision. The court determined that Chapter 271 of the Texas Local Government Code, as applicable to the 2004 contract, did not waive governmental immunity for attorney's fees. Furthermore, the court rejected arguments that CPS waived immunity by seeking affirmative relief or engaging in a proprietary function. The appellate court concluded that the trial court properly granted the plea to the jurisdiction due to the absence of a clear and unambiguous waiver of immunity for attorney's fees.

Governmental ImmunityAttorney's FeesBreach of ContractPlea to JurisdictionTexas Local Government CodeChapter 271Waiver of ImmunityProprietary FunctionSubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate Review
References
20
Case No. ADJ10983565
Regular
Aug 18, 2025

DERRYL THOMPSON vs. VICTORY OUTREACH CHINO, CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., MISSION ACTS MINISTRIES, MECUM ACUTIONS, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INS. CO.

Applicant Derryl Thompson claimed injury while working for alleged employers Victory Outreach Chino (general employer), Mission Acts Ministries (employer and personnel staffing agency), and Mecum Auctions, Inc. (special employer). Defendants Zurich American Insurance Company and Church Mutual Insurance Company sought reconsideration of the Findings and Order that established this dual employment relationship. The Appeals Board denied both petitions for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the applicant was an employee and not a volunteer, and that Victory was a general employer while Mecum was a special employer, rejecting the defendants' arguments for exclusion under Labor Code sections 3352(a)(2) and (a)(9).

General employerSpecial employerVolunteer exclusionLabor Code 3352(a)(2)Labor Code 3352(a)(9)Aid or sustenanceRemunerationDual employmentStaffing agencyNon-profit status
References
24
Case No. ADJ1627678 (POM 0300392)
Regular
Jun 02, 2011

SUZANNE SIEVERTSON vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

This case involves Suzanne Sievertson's workers' compensation claim against the County of San Bernardino. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the applicant. The WCAB adopted the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) and denied the reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDenying ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportAdopted reportIncorporated reportAdministrative Law JudgePermissibly-InsuredCounty of San BernardinoApplicant
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 955 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