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. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a denial of workers' compensation benefits, which was based on the finding that his claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board affirmed the denial, concluding that the applicant's job abandonment led to a termination prior to the filing of his claims. The Board also determined that the employer properly denied both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating a presumption of compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeApplicantDefendantRalphs Grocery CompanySecurity GuardIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ11399627
Regular
Nov 25, 2019

ISAI CHILEL vs. KISHO, INC. dba SUSHI CALIFORNIA, EMPLOYERS ASSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant sought to overturn a finding that the applicant sustained a work-related injury and that it was not barred by the post-termination defense. The Board found that the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof to establish termination or layoff under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10). Evidence regarding the applicant's departure from employment was ambiguous, not clearly establishing a termination rather than a voluntary resignation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code Section 3600(a)(10)post-termination defensepetition for reconsiderationfindings and orderapplicantdefendantinjuryleft handsubstantial medical evidence
References
Case No. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that his injury claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board agreed that the applicant's claims were barred under Labor Code sections 3600(a)(10) and 3208.3(e) as they were filed after notice of termination and no exceptions applied. The Board also determined that the defendant's denial letter encompassed both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating the presumption of compensability under Labor Code section 5402(b).

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJRalphs Grocery Companyindustrial injurypsycheheadright shoulderneck
References
Case No. ADJ6668547
Regular
Mar 15, 2010

MARIA COVARRUBIAS vs. KELLY SERVICES, INC., ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to applicant Maria Covarrubias. The Board rescinded the prior decision that barred her claim under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10) due to a post-termination filing defense. The Board found that the applicant, as a temporary agency employee, was not terminated or laid off prior to reporting her injury. Therefore, her claim is not barred, and the matter is returned for further proceedings on other issues.

Labor Code section 3600(a)(10)post-termination defensePetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Orderindustrial injuryneck and left shouldertemporary agencylayoffterminationactive employee
References
Case No. ADJ7751160
Regular
Jun 26, 2012

WALLACE MANNS vs. AMERICAN LABOR POOL, OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION

This case concerns a worker's compensation claim for an inguinal hernia sustained prior to a layoff. The employer argued the claim was barred by Labor Code section 3600(a)(10) as it was filed after notice of termination. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the Administrative Law Judge erred by requiring proof of retaliatory intent. The Board rescinded the original finding, concluding the post-termination defense applied as no exceptions under the statute were met. The applicant's claim was therefore barred.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardWallace MannsAmerican Labor PoolOld Republic General Insurance CorporationADJ7751160Riverside District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ8394203
Regular
Oct 08, 2013

Anthony Miranda vs. Fresno Unified School District

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Anthony Miranda's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision that his injury claim was barred under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10). Miranda failed to prove any of the statutory exceptions, specifically that his employer had notice of the injury before his termination notice, that his pre-termination medical records documented the injury, or that the injury occurred after his termination notice. The Board found that Miranda admitted he did not report the injury until after his termination and that no medical evidence existed prior to his termination notice. Therefore, his claim for the May 9, 2012, bus accident injury was denied.

Labor Code 3600(a)(10)Petition for ReconsiderationDenial of ReconsiderationTimeliness of ClaimNotice of TerminationPre-Termination InjuryMedical RecordsSurveillance VideoIndustrial InjuryWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ8385599
Regular
Oct 17, 2014

Joseph Toscano vs. Westlake Health Center, Seabright Insurance Company

This case involves an admitted industrial back injury sustained by applicant Joseph Toscano. The defendant seeks reconsideration of the WCJ's award, arguing the judge improperly relied on the primary treating physician's report over the PQME's and erred in awarding a 15% permanent disability increase due to alleged termination for cause. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the original award except for deferring the issue of the section 4658(d) increase. This deferral is necessary pending resolution of a potential Labor Code section 132a claim regarding whether applicant was terminated in retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim, which would impact eligibility for the increase.

WCABindustrial injurynursing assistantlow backtemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityprimary treating physicianPQMELabor Code section 4658(d)reconsideration
References
Case No. VNO 487026
Regular
Jul 08, 2008

Frank Lujan vs. CG MILLER INC., Republic Indemnity Company of California

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the disallowance of a $\$ 12,547.06$ lien for medical treatment expenses. This decision was based on the finding that the applicant did not sustain an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment, as the claim was filed after the applicant's termination and no exceptions under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10) were met. The employer lacked prior notice of the injury, and there was insufficient evidence of pre-termination medical records or an injury occurring after notice of termination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderAdministrative Law JudgeIndustrial InjuryLow BackMover/PackerSelf-Procured Medical TreatmentLabor Code Section 3600(a)(10)
References
Case No. ADJ8969860
Regular
Jul 28, 2016

Miguel Cortez vs. American Security Force, Inc., The Hartford

This case involves an applicant, Miguel Cortez, who sought workers' compensation benefits for an alleged injury to his left shoulder sustained on May 28, 2013. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied his Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding. The Board found Cortez failed to meet his burden of proof for a compensable injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment. This decision was based heavily on the judge's credibility determination regarding Cortez's inconsistent testimony about the incident and conflicting accounts of the injury provided to medical providers.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationCredibility determinationBurden of proofLabor Code § 3600(a)(10)Industrial injuryCompensable injuryWCJ reportWitness demeanorTerminated employee
References
Case No. LAO 855766
Regular
Jul 16, 2007

JUAN L. FLORES vs. HEDENBERG, INC., dba IHOP, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the defendant's petition to terminate temporary total disability indemnity. While the defendant's initial petition had procedural defects, including failing to adhere to filing deadlines and content requirements, the Board found that Labor Code section 4700 dictates no liability for temporary disability benefits exists beyond the date of the applicant's death. Consequently, the Board rescinded the prior order and issued a new order terminating the defendant's liability for temporary total disability indemnity as of February 20, 2007, the date of the applicant's death.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Terminating LiabilityTemporary Total Disability IndemnityLabor Code Section 4700Applicant's DeathPermanent and StationaryPetition to Terminate LiabilityCalifornia Code of RegulationsRule 10462
References
Showing 1-10 of 700 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