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. ADJ4115739 (VNO 0487593)
Regular

ZACH WALZ vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS; RISK ENTERPRISE 2314 BREA

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, concerning applicant Zach Walz against defendants Arizona Cardinals and Risk Enterprise, resulted in an order granting a petition for reconsideration. All future case-related communications are to be directed to the Commissioners' Office in San Francisco, pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration. The order was dated and filed on October 11, 2001.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationCommissioners' OfficeADJ4115739VNO 0487593VNO 0487351VNO 0487591VNO 0487592Arizona Cardinals
References
Case No. ADJ1342611 (VNO 0441003), ADJ1741808 (VNO 0451440), ADJ1305070 (VNO 0443590), ADJ1323906 (VNO 0450865)
Regular
Jan 08, 2014

Mark A. Margolis vs. Albertson, Sedgwick CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by the petitioner. This dismissal occurred because the petitioner voluntarily withdrew their petition. The original decision being reconsidered was issued on October 18, 2012. This order officially closes the reconsideration process for that decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalWithdrawn PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAlbertsonSedgwick CMSMark MargolisOctober 18 2012 decisionADJ1342611VNO 0441003
References
Case No. VNO 0510561, VNO 0510562
Regular

JANIS RUSH vs. CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The defendant, State Compensation Insurance Fund, petitioned for removal to amend an order closing discovery to allow a deposition, but the petition was denied. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found the petition contained irrelevant information, suggesting it was partially plagiarized from another case. Crucially, the Board determined the closure of discovery would not cause significant prejudice or irreparable harm to the defendant.

petition for removalagreed medical evaluatorclosure of discoverysignificant prejudiceirreparable harmWCAB Rule 10843Report and Recommendationworkers' compensation administrative law judgeDENYING REMOVALCALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
References
Case No. ADJ481102 (VNO 0424558) ADJ1281091 (VNO 0424557) ADJ3604732 (VNO 0481998)
Regular
Jul 30, 2010

VERNA CLAYVON vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES

This case involves Verna Clayvon's workers' compensation claims against the County of Los Angeles and its insurer. The applicant filed a Petition for Reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report. The WCAB denied the Petition for Reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's reasoning.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDenying ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeCounty of Los AngelesIntercare Insurance ServicesADJ481102ADJ1281091ADJ3604732VNO 0424558
References
Case No. VNO 0382377, VNO 0382378, VNO 0382379
Regular
Mar 18, 2008

LAURA AGUIAR vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that awarded 93% permanent disability without adequate apportionment. The Board found that the medical reports relied upon by the WCJ did not sufficiently address apportionment to prior injuries or other factors as required by law. Consequently, the case is returned to the trial level for further development of the record and a new decision, ensuring proper apportionment and separate determinations for each injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLaura AguiarCounty of Los AngelesPermissibly Self-InsuredVNO 0382377VNO 0382378VNO 0382379Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardFindings of Fact
References
Case No. ADJ2652747 (VNO 0344824) ADJ3178119 (VNO 0349849) ADJ4566361 (VNO 0401733)
Regular
Jun 25, 2012

MARK RAINE vs. CITYOF BURBANK

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Mark Raine, the applicant, in his workers' compensation claims against the City of Burbank. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the report of the Workers' Compensation Judge. For the reasons stated in the Judge's report, which the Board adopted, the petition for reconsideration has been denied. Therefore, the Board has ordered that the petition for reconsideration be denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADJ2652747ADJ3178119ADJ4566361CITY OF BURBANKVNO 0344824VNO 0349849VNO 0401733DENYING RECONSIDERATIONWCJ REPORT
References
Case No. ADJ3283274 (VNO 0386537) ADJ4545965 (VNO 0386536) ADJ3421140 (VNO 0347301)
Regular
Jan 25, 2010

BARBARA STRAUSS vs. WEST MARINE, INC., CIGA for RELIANCE in liquidation, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY, FIREMAN'S FUND

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denying reconsideration. The error involved the incorrect assignment of ADJ and VNO numbers to the relevant case numbers. The WCAB is correcting this error to accurately reflect the case numbers as ADJ3283274 and VNO 0386537. This correction ensures proper record-keeping for applicant Barbara Strauss and defendants West Marine, Inc., et al.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Denying ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeClerical ErrorCorrected Case NumberADJ NumberVNO NumberReversal of NumbersLiquidation
References
Case No. ADJ2867157 (VNO 0476310) ADJ4292086 (VNO 0470201)
Regular
Jan 05, 2012

TERESA VASQUEZ vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case involves a clerical error in a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order. The Board inadvertently listed January 21, 2011, as the filing and service date for its December 21, 2011, opinion and orders. The correction order clarifies that the correct filing and service date was indeed December 21, 2011. This amendment is a procedural correction of a minor administrative mistake.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardclerical erroropinion and orderspetitions for reconsiderationremovalfiling and service datecorrect file datecorrect service dateADJ2867157VNO 0476310
References
Case No. VNO 0436397
Regular
Apr 08, 2008

JOSE CUELLAR vs. CENTURY PLAZA HOTEL, CNA TRANSCONTINENTAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Jose Cuellar's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The petition was filed more than 20 days after the original decision, and the additional 5 days for mailing did not cure the defect. Had the petition been timely, it would have been denied on the merits based on the administrative law judge's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingWCAB Rule 10840Labor Code $\S$ 5903Code of Civil Procedure $\S$ 1013Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeDismissalMailing TimeOfficial Address Record
References
Case No. VNO 388892, VNO 388897
Regular
Dec 21, 2007

DARRELL BOWEN vs. GALPIN MOTORS, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision regarding Darrell Bowen's claim against Galpin Motors and Liberty Mutual. While affirming the original decision, the Board amended one finding of fact to assess a 25% penalty for unreasonable delay in providing medical treatment, not exceeding $10,000. The parties were directed to adjust this penalty with jurisdiction reserved.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationWCJ reportMedical treatment delayPenalty assessmentUnreasonably delayedJurisdiction reservedOpinion and OrderDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of Fact
References
Showing 1-10 of 87 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