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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 1995

In re Jordan Rehabilitation Service, Inc.

Jordan Rehabilitation Service, Inc., providing medical and vocational rehabilitative services, appealed a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board assessed additional unemployment insurance contributions, finding that specialists hired by Jordan were employees, not independent contractors, between 1989 and 1991. The court reviewed whether there was substantial evidence to support the Board's conclusion of an employer-employee relationship. Key factors included Jordan's control over recruitment, screening, compensation, billing, and contractual restrictions on specialists. Ultimately, the court affirmed the Board's decision, determining that Jordan exercised sufficient overall control to establish an employer-employee relationship and thus was liable for the contributions.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent ContractorRehabilitation ServicesLabor LawSubstantial EvidenceControl TestJudicial ReviewAdministrative Law JudgeDepartment of Labor
References
8
Case No. AD.J8681155
Regular
May 13, 2016

LONNIE SMITH vs. LEE'S CONCRETE MATERIALS, INC., MARKEL INSURANCE COMPANY, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a defendant's Petition for Removal of an administrative law judge's (ALJ) order allowing applicant's attorney fees for attending a vocational rehabilitation examination. However, the WCAB treated the petition as one for reconsideration and granted it, rescinding the ALJ's order. The WCAB found that Labor Code section 5710, which covers deposition fees, does not apply to vocational rehabilitation examinations. The matter was returned to the ALJ for further proceedings and a new decision consistent with the WCAB's opinion.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5710Vocational Feasibility ExpertAttorney's FeesWCABMinute OrderPrejudiceIrreparable HarmTimeliness
References
4
Case No. ADJ8132311
Regular
Aug 12, 2019

Celia Kalbaugh vs. County of Kern

This case involves a claim by Celia Kalbaugh for 100% permanent disability due to a psyche injury sustained as a Deputy Detentions Officer. The defendant, County of Kern, contested the findings, arguing the Agreed Medical Examiner was unqualified to assess employability and that the applicant was capable of vocational rehabilitation. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the original award, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that the Agreed Medical Examiner's findings of profound cognitive deficits preventing work were persuasive. The Board also found the applicant's vocational consultant's opinion, supporting unsuitability for rehabilitation and the open labor market, credible.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCelia KalbaughCounty of KernPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Orders and Awardpermanent disabilityDeputy Detentions Officerpsyche injuryAgreed Medical Examinervocational rehabilitation
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Luxenberg v. Jericho Atrium Associates, Inc.

Marcy Luxenberg, a plaintiff in a personal injury action against Jericho Atrium Associates, Inc. for a slip and fall, sought a protective order against the defendant's request for an examination by an occupational and rehabilitation therapist, Dr. Ehrenreich. The plaintiff argued that CPLR 3121 restricts such examinations to physicians. Justice Bernard F. McCaffrey, presiding in a trial court within the Second Department, noted the conflicting precedents across Appellate Division departments, with the First, Third, and Fourth Departments generally limiting examinations to physicians, while the Second Department allowed non-physician experts under specific conditions, such as for psychological injuries or when reciprocity is established. However, the court found that the plaintiff's injuries were primarily orthopedic and neurological, and she had already agreed to examinations by medical doctors. The defendant failed to prove the inadequacy of these existing examinations or a compelling need for reciprocity, as the plaintiff had not yet designated her own vocational expert. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's protective order, denying the defendant's request for examination by Dr. Ehrenreich, but allowed the defendant to renew the motion if the plaintiff later retains a vocational expert.

Personal InjurySlip and FallDiscoveryCPLR 3121Non-Physician ExaminationVocational RehabilitationOccupational TherapyProtective OrderInter-Departmental ConflictSecond Department Precedent
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Grady v. AHRC NYC New Projects, Inc.

Michael Grady and Judith Grady, plaintiffs in this action, sought damages for personal injuries Michael sustained in a work-related accident. Fourth-party defendant Nead Electric moved to vacate the plaintiffs' note of issue and certificate of readiness for trial, seeking further discovery and a vocational rehabilitation examination. Nead argued that the plaintiff's late expert disclosure, quantifying economic losses at $1.5 million, constituted unusual circumstances justifying additional pretrial proceedings. Defendant/third-party plaintiff AHRC NYC New Projects, Inc. supported Nead's motion. The plaintiffs opposed, citing untimeliness and potential prejudice. The court granted Nead's motion, finding the late expert disclosure of economic damages to be unusual and unanticipated circumstances. The court ordered the plaintiff to comply with discovery and undergo a vocational rehabilitation examination.

Discovery disputeNote of issueCertificate of readinessVocational rehabilitationExpert disclosureEconomic lossPersonal injuryWork-related accidentCPLR 3101Vacate note of issue
References
7
Case No. ADJ3680333 (LAO 0797706), ADJ1445214 (LAO 0814077), ADJ4283483 (LAO 0885924)
Regular
May 01, 2009

TANNY L. ROBERTS vs. WEBER METALS, AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ASSOCIATES INDEMNITY CORPORATION, FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES

Defendant Fireman's Fund sought reconsideration of a Finding and Order that relieved defendant AIG from vocational rehabilitation liability. The WCJ's decision was based on an Agreed Medical Examiner's report stating the need for rehabilitation was solely attributable to a cumulative trauma injury covered by Fireman's Fund. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the case to the trial level. This action was to allow consideration of the impact of Labor Code Section 139.5's repeal on vocational rehabilitation claims.

Vocational rehabilitationCumulative traumaMedical opinionPermanent disabilityRehabilitation UnitSpecific injuryFindings and OrderReconsiderationLabor Code Section 139.5Agreed Medical Examiner
References
1
Case No. ADJ8681155
Regular
Aug 01, 2016

LONNIE SMITH vs. LEE'S CONCRETE MATERIALS, INC., MARKEL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case addresses a clerical error in a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision which incorrectly stated a defendant's Petition for Removal was denied instead of dismissed. The WCAB granted reconsideration on its own motion to correct this error and amended the prior decision to reflect the dismissal. Applicant sought reconsideration of this correction, arguing the original petition was untimely and requesting attorney's fees for a vocational rehabilitation exam. The WCAB denied applicant's petition, reaffirming that the defendant's petition was timely filed and that attorney fees are not awarded for attendance at vocational rehabilitation examinations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationClerical ErrorTimelinessService of ProcessMinute OrderVocational Rehabilitation ExaminationLabor Code Section 5710Attorney's Fees
References
1
Case No. ADJ8772254
Regular
Jul 20, 2017

Lorenzo Hernandez vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Lorenzo Hernandez's petition for reconsideration, upholding the original award of 24% permanent disability for a right shoulder injury. The applicant argued that a vocational expert's report should have rebutted the scheduled disability rating, but the Board found this report insufficient. Relying on *Ogilvie* and *Dahl*, the Board determined that an applicant's amenability to vocational rehabilitation precludes using vocational expert testimony to challenge a scheduled rating based on lost earning capacity. Therefore, the vocational expert's opinion was deemed not substantial evidence to overcome the QME's scheduled rating.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityVocational ExpertQualified Medical EvaluatorScheduled RatingReconsiderationLabor Code §4660.1AMA Guides 5th EditionAmenability to Vocational RehabilitationDiminished Future Earning Capacity
References
3
Case No. ADJ9025732
Regular
Apr 07, 2023

ALBERT MATA vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding of 100% permanent total disability for the applicant, Albert Mata. The defendant argued that the applicant's vocational counselor's reports and medical reports did not constitute substantial evidence for total disability. However, the Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision, finding the vocational expert's opinions were substantial evidence, not based on speculation, and correctly applied California's 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule for psychiatric impairments. Therefore, the Board concluded the applicant was precluded from vocational rehabilitation and participating in the labor force.

Permanent total disabilityPsychiatric injuryVocational Rehabilitation CounselorAmerican Medical Association GuidesGlobal Assessment of FunctioningPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleSubstantial evidencePetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeAgreed Medical Examiner
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 14, 2014

Forest Rehabilitation Medicine PC v. Allstate Insurance

Plaintiff Forest Rehabilitation Medicine PC sued defendant Allstate to recover $3,490 for no-fault medical benefits provided to assignor Tracy Fertitta. The core issue was the medical necessity of "Calmare pain therapy" (scrambler therapy), a novel treatment. The court conducted a bench trial, hearing expert testimony from both sides. Dr. Ayman Hadhoud, for the defense, argued the treatment was not medically necessary, not cost-effective, and essentially a form of physical therapy. Dr. Jack D’Angelo, for the plaintiff, countered that the therapy, though new, had FDA approval, was used by the military, and reduced the assignor's pain levels. Applying the Frye standard, the court found the evidence regarding Calmare scrambler therapy reliable and ruled it was medically necessary for Ms. Fertitta's pain management. Consequently, judgment was awarded to the plaintiff, Forest Rehabilitation Medicine PC, for $3,490 plus attorney's fees and interest.

No-Fault InsuranceMedical NecessityCalmare Pain TherapyScrambler TherapyNovel TreatmentFrye StandardExpert TestimonyPain ManagementFDA ApprovalCervical Radiculopathy
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 2,602 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