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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ3565194 (BAK 0139614)
Regular
Dec 04, 2015

TAMMY AGOSTA vs. VONS, A SAFEWAY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award of $61\%$ permanent disability for an industrial injury. She argued that the administrative law judge erred and that she should be found permanently totally disabled ($100\%$) based on vocational expert and medical evaluations. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied her petition, adopting the WCJ's report. However, one commissioner dissented, arguing that the applicant's significant medical restrictions and vocational expert's opinion supported a finding of $100\%$ permanent disability.

AgostaVonsSafewayWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Orders and Awardadministrative law judgecumulative injuryright shoulderright upper extremity
References
Case No. FRE 0065599
Regular
Mar 04, 2008

JOHN ALLEN vs. KENT MAGNELL CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied John Allen's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision to terminate his vocational rehabilitation services due to a consistent failure to cooperate. The Board found that Allen's persistent insistence on a specific, unachievable vocational goal, coupled with his refusal to undergo necessary medical evaluations and provide requested records, led to the impasse. Consequently, his request for retroactive benefits and vocational rehabilitation was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVocational RehabilitationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderRehabilitation UnitSuitable Gainful EmploymentVocational Rehabilitation Maintenance AllowanceAverage Weekly EarningsTemporary Disability IndemnityCompromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ9845740
Regular
Dec 18, 2019

RICHARD OKUNIEWICZ vs. CHRISTOFFERSON TRANSPORTATION, QBE-PRAETORIAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an employer's petition for removal challenging a judge's order denying a motion to compel an in-person vocational evaluation. The Appeals Board denied the petition, treating it as a reconsideration request because the underlying order resolved threshold issues. Although the decision was final regarding threshold matters, the Board reviewed the discovery dispute under the extraordinary removal standard. The majority found no significant prejudice or irreparable harm from denying the in-person evaluation, as a remote evaluation was deemed sufficient.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and OrderMedical-Legal EvaluationCompelSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmThreshold IssueInterlocutory IssueVocational Evaluation
References
Case No. ADJ10256108, ADJ10255968, ADJ10256212, ADJ10256223, ADJ10489875
Regular
Sep 23, 2022

JOSEPH RYAN vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board affirmed the finding of permanent and total disability for the applicant, Joseph Ryan, stemming from industrial injuries sustained while employed as a correctional captain. However, the Board remanded the matter for further proceedings to specifically address apportionment of the permanent disability under Labor Code section 4663, considering the Agreed Medical Evaluator's opinion on pre-existing spinal disease. The Board found that the applicant's specific and cumulative trauma injuries to his spine resulted in intertwined disabilities, justifying a combined award, but that Dr. Hasday's apportionment findings require further development and determination at the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoseph RyanCalifornia Department of CorrectionsLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ10256108ADJ10255968ADJ10256212ADJ10256223ADJ10489875
References
Case No. ADJ9607136
Regular
Mar 13, 2023

NORMA PEREZ vs. CUSTOM PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) decision. The WCJ found the applicant to be 100% permanently and totally disabled based on credible testimony and substantial medical and vocational evidence. The defendant's arguments regarding non-industrial apportionment and the vocational evaluator's reporting without an interpreter were rejected. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and decision, denying the defendant's request for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationReport and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDenying PetitionAdministrative Law JudgeCumulative TraumaNon-industrial Medical ApportionmentNon-industrial Vocational ApportionmentInterpreterVocational Evaluator
References
Case No. ADJ1966312 (AHM 0071600)
Regular
Jul 02, 2009

CHERYL BOND-DICKEY vs. LAW OFFICE OF SATIN & RUSSELL, SCIF INSURED SANTA ANA

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a finding of 100% permanent disability for a paralegal/file clerk who sustained an industrial injury. The defendant argued the vocational expert's evaluation was insufficient. However, the Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the defendant failed to request further vocational evaluation at trial or provide rebuttal evidence. The Board also noted the defendant's petition lacked the specific detail and record references required by regulation.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardFindings Award and Orderspermanent disabilityvocational expertopen labor marketpetition for reconsiderationagreed vocational evaluatorsubstantial medical evidenceReport and Recommendationindustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ8210063; ADJ8621818
Regular
Feb 27, 2025

GRACE NUNES vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES; administered by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Grace Nunes, an applicant, sustained industrial injuries to her neck, left shoulder, and bilateral upper extremities while employed by the State of California, Department of Motor Vehicles. Following a prior reconsideration, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) clarified that 'vocational apportionment' is impermissible and vocational evidence must align with medical apportionment. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) ordered further development of the record with the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) and vocational experts to comply with the Board's decisions. Applicant petitioned for reconsideration or removal of this interlocutory order, which the Appeals Board denied, affirming the WCJ's discretion to develop the record for a just and reasoned decision.

Industrial injuryNeck injuryShoulder injuryBilateral upper extremitiesField representativeVocational retrainingPermanent and total disabilityVocational apportionmentMedical apportionmentQualified Medical Evaluator
References
Case No. ADJ358084 (OAK 0320488)
Regular
Dec 19, 2008

Samuel Arledge vs. RGW Construction, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award finding the applicant sustained 39% permanent disability. The applicant argued for 100% disability based on a vocational expert's opinion and Labor Code section 4662. The Board found the WCJ erred by not fully considering the vocational expert's opinion, specifically regarding the applicant's employability and earning capacity post-injury. The case is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings to re-evaluate the vocational expert's findings and determine the applicant's total disability status.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative Trauma InjuryPermanent DisabilityVocational ExpertLabor Code Section 4662Qualified Medical EvaluatorImpairment RatingWPIFunctional Capacity EvaluationTransferable Skills
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,030 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

ยฉ 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational