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. 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. ADJ1535496 (VNO 0558277)
Regular
Feb 06, 2012

MARIA GUTIERREZ vs. OAKDALE HEIGHTS MANAGEMENT, WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant petitioned for removal to object to an order setting trial, but later agreed to a Compromise and Release during trial. Defendant then withdrew its Petition for Removal, which the Board granted. The Board dismissed the petition without prejudice, allowing the WCJ to act on the C&R. If the C&R is rejected and trial is rescheduled, defendant may refile the petition.

Petition for RemovalCompromise and ReleaseWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalAdministrative Law JudgeApprovalRe-set for trialWithout prejudiceWausau Insurance Company
References
Case No. ADJ7298811
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

JONATHAN WYCINSKY vs. CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted by YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: Applicant, a police officer, sustained an industrial shoulder injury and was initially paid full salary under Labor Code § 4850. He later voluntarily resigned for financial reasons unrelated to his injury to accept a position with another city. The Board found that a voluntary, non-medical resignation terminates the employment relationship required for a § 4850 leave of absence. Therefore, the defendant is not liable for continued full salary payments post-resignation, despite the applicant remaining employed as a police officer elsewhere.

Labor Code section 4850police officervoluntary resignationnonmedical reasonsleave of absencefull salarytemporary disabilityindustrial injurytermination of employmentCity of Citrus Heights
References
Case No. ADJ671568 (VNO 0519723)
Regular
Jun 05, 2009

KAREN REFF vs. UNION OF AMERICAN HEBREW CONGREGATION, MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT

This case involves an applicant claiming her industrial pneumonia aggravated a pre-existing common variable immunodeficiency (CVID), necessitating ongoing immunoglobulin treatment. The defendant disputes that the pneumonia aggravated the CVID or that the treatment is causally related to the industrial injury. The Agreed Medical Evaluator could not definitively opine on CVID aggravation without reviewing later medical records. Consequently, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the case for further medical development and a new decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPneumoniaCommon Variable Immunodeficiency (CVID)Immunoglobulin Replacement TreatmentsAggravationAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Further Development of Record
References
Case No. ADJ2829061 (SDO 0316299)
Regular
Oct 11, 2013

JOSE ABRIL vs. BARDON ENTERPRISES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCIES

This case involves a Petition for Removal by the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) seeking to dismiss liens filed by Mission Valley Heights Surgery Center and Poway Surgery Center. SCIF argued that a prior decision dismissing their liens in a separate case should apply to all liens within the current consolidation. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied SCIF's petition, clarifying that the prior dismissal was limited to the specific case cited and did not affect all liens in the consolidation. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and declined to consider sanctions.

Petition for RemovalMaster FileConsolidationLien Activation FeesDismissed LiensSanctionsWCABWCJState Compensation Insurance FundMission Valley Heights Surgery Center
References
Case No. ADJ4571860
Regular
Oct 16, 2008

FRANK REID vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

The Appeals Board reversed the trial judge's decision, finding the applicant's skin cancer was not an insidious, progressive disease and thus jurisdiction over permanent disability could not be reserved. They also disallowed apportionment of the applicant's 37 percent permanent disability, as he had no prior awards and was covered by a statutory exception for peace officer injuries. The Board established July 28, 2003, as the permanent and stationary date and corrected the date of injury to July 28, 2003.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFrank ReidCounty of San DiegoCriminal Investigator IVindustrial injuryskin cancerinsidious disease processpermanent and stationarypermanent disabilityapportionment
References
Case No. SAC 286368
Regular
Jan 25, 2008

DALE OLIVER vs. BRIAN WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an applicant seeking approval for disc replacement surgery for a work-related back injury. The defendant argued the surgery is experimental per ACOEM guidelines, thus not covered. The Board denied reconsideration, finding the applicant's physician rebutted the presumption of experimental status. The Board determined the surgery is no longer experimental, citing FDA approval, and is reasonably required for the applicant's specific condition, supported by expert medical opinion.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBrian Williams ConstructionState Compensation Insurance Fundindustrial injuryright anklefootelbowshoulderskneesleft lower extremity
References
Case No. ADJ7096070
Regular
Jan 18, 2011

HUGO PEREZ vs. CONSTRUCTION ZONE, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant injured in a scaffolding fall who also claims psychiatric injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the applicant, employed for less than six months, argued his psychiatric injury stemmed from a "sudden and extraordinary" event. The Board found the protective tubing giving way during his fall constituted an extraordinary event, thus excepting it from the six-month employment rule for psychiatric claims. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Labor Code section 3208.3(d)psychiatric injurysix-month employment rulesudden and extraordinary eventscaffoldingfall from heightprotective tubingcompensabilityreconsiderationrescinded
References
Case No. ADJ9749879
Regular
Mar 22, 2017

HERNAN VILLACIS vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SHERIFF'S DEPT.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the previous findings of fact and returned the case for further proceedings. The central issue is whether the applicant's fall from a four-story building was an industrial injury or an intentional self-inflicted act. The Board found that the trial level erred by excluding the applicant's wife's testimony, which may have provided crucial evidence on the applicant's mental state. Furthermore, the Board noted the lack of medical evidence to definitively determine if the fall was suicidal, requiring further development of the record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryReconsiderationSelf-Inflicted InjuryMarital PrivilegeFall from HeightIntentional JumpSlip and FallCredibility DeterminationMedical Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ9610649
Regular
Sep 18, 2015

MARIA CASTELLANOS vs. MEDTRONICS, ESIS CHATSWORTH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the findings of the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) who found the applicant did not sustain the alleged injury. The WCJ found the applicant's supervisor's testimony regarding the applicant's job duties to be credible, contradicting the applicant's account of heavy lifting. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determinations, as the judge observed the witnesses directly.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationWCALJcredibility determinationcumulative traumaindustrial causationstock clerkMedtronicsACE USAExhibit 1
References
Showing 1-10 of 19 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