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. ADJ8489417, ADJ8004557, ADJ8004568
Regular
Jun 30, 2015

ROCIO LUMBRANO vs. VOORTMANS EGG RANCH, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves applicant Rocío Lumbrano against Voortmans Egg Ranch and Imperium Insurance Company. The Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration on procedural grounds. The Board also initiated removal proceedings on its own motion and issued a notice of intention to sanction the applicant and/or her representative for engaging in frivolous litigation.

Rocio LumbranoVoortmans Egg RanchImperium Insurance CompanyADJ8489417ADJ8004557ADJ8004568Pomona District OfficePetition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionGranting Removal
References
Case No. ADJ747812 (LAO 0828642)
Regular
Apr 25, 2013

BENITO ALVARADO vs. GROSS EGG RANCH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Reconsideration in the case of Benito Alvarado v. Gross Egg Ranch and State Compensation Insurance Fund. The WCAB found the petition to be untimely and also subject to denial for failing to fairly state material evidence as required by WCAB Rule 10842(a). Specifically, the lien claimant's assertion that the case was never on calendar was contradicted by the electronic record. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyWCAB 10842(a)Material EvidenceFair StatementEAMSEvents RecordCommunications RecordLien ClaimantDismissed
References
Case No. ADJ8004557, ADJ8489417, ADJ8004568
Regular
Oct 26, 2015

ROCO LUMBRANO vs. VOORTMANS EGG RANCH, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration in the case of Roco Lumbrano versus Voortmans Egg Ranch and Imperium Insurance Company. The WCAB found that further study of the factual and legal issues was necessary to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future communications regarding the petition must be directed to the Office of the Commissioners, not district offices. The WCAB also noted that trial level actions not related to the petition should continue through EAMS, but any proposed settlement must be promptly communicated to the Appeals Board.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationGrant of ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual IssuesLegal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionOffice of the CommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMS
References
Case No. ADJ11676994
Regular
Aug 28, 2019

CLIFFORD MOORHOUSE vs. ALISAL GUEST RANCH, TRAVELERS DIAMOND BAR

This case concerns the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award finding the applicant an employee. The applicant, a farrier, claimed cumulative industrial injury while working for the defendant ranch. The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's finding that the applicant was an employee under the *Borello* standard. The Board found the defendant failed to meet its burden to prove independent contractor status, citing factors like the defendant's control over the work and the applicant's lack of investment. The Board also clarified that the *Dynamex* ABC test, while applicable to wage orders, does not supersede the *Borello* standard for workers' compensation employment determinations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClifford MoorhouseAlisal Guest RanchTravelers Diamond Barfinding of fact and awardpresumption of employmentsubstantial evidenceS. G. Borello & Sonsindependent contractorright to control
References
Case No. ADJ3605789 (GOL 0101314) ADJ2387995 (GOL 0101316) ADJ460036 (GOL 0101615)
Regular
Dec 12, 2011

JORGE VIVANCO vs. NEVERLAND VALLEY RANCH, ESTATE OF MICHAEL JACKSON, MJJ PRODUCTIONS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY, UNITED STAFFING ASSOCIATES, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, MONARCH CONSULTING dba PES PAYROLL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant claiming injuries while employed as a zookeeper for Neverland Valley Ranch and other entities. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior findings, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found that the trial judge erred by excluding evidence related to employment agreements under the parol evidence rule, which is relevant to determining employer status. Further development of the record is required to properly address the applicant's employment relationships with the defendant entities.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJorge VivancoNeverland Valley RanchMichael JacksonMJJ ProductionsTravelers IndemnityUnited Staffing AssociatesAmerican Home Assurance CompanyMonarch ConsultingPES Payroll
References
Case No. ADJ6616986; ADJ6603689; AD6616952
Regular
Aug 20, 2018

TERRY LEMBCKE vs. IVANHOE RANCH PARTNERS, LLC, HENRY GAMBOA

This case concerns Terry Lembcke's workers' compensation claims against Ivanhoe Ranch Partners, LLC and Henry Gamboa. The applicant alleged he was a statutory employee under Labor Code §2750.5 due to the nature of his work, which he claimed required contractor licenses that the defendants' entity lacked. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the WCJ's decision, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. The Board found that the defendants failed to rebut the presumption of employment under Labor Code §2750.5.

Statutory employeeLabor Code 2750.5Petition for ReconsiderationUninsured Employers Benefit Trust FundIvanhoe Ranch Partners LLCHenry Gamboawillful misconductindependent contractor statuscontractor's licenserebuttable presumption
References
Case No. ADJ3529177 (GOL 0091851) ADJ4931121
Regular
Feb 25, 2016

LAURA BAGLEY vs. ALISAL GUEST RANCH AND RESORT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendant, Alisal Guest Ranch and Resort and State Compensation Insurance Fund, regarding a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board has granted reconsideration because they need more time to thoroughly review the factual and legal issues presented. This ensures a complete understanding of the record for a just and reasoned decision. All future communications related to the petition must be sent directly to the Board's Commissioners in San Francisco and not filed through the district office or e-filed.

Laura BagleyAlisal Guest Ranch and ResortState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ3529177ADJ4931121Oxnard District OfficeOpinion and OrderStatutory Time Constraints
References
Case No. ADJ8004557; ADJ8489417; ADJ8004568
Regular
Aug 19, 2015

ROCIO LUMBRANO vs. VOORTMANS EGG RANCH, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY

Attorney Brenda E. Vargas is sanctioned $1,500 and ordered to pay defense and applicant's attorneys' fees for filing a frivolous and time-barred petition for reconsideration. Vargas lacked standing as she never substituted into the case as attorney of record, failing to address multiple warnings. The Appeals Board found her petition lacked any proof of representation, citation to the record, and was filed well beyond the statutory deadline.

RemovalSanctionsProof of RepresentationPetition for ReconsiderationTime-BarredFrivolousSubstitution of AttorneyStandingLegal JustificationPleading
References
Case No. GRO 034460
Regular
Feb 15, 2008

MARGARITA SALAS vs. RANCH HARVEST, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed an award of additional temporary disability benefits. The Board found that the applicant's claim for temporary disability indemnity for the period of February 10, 2007, through March 20, 2007, was barred by Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) as it fell outside the two-year limitation from the first payment of temporary disability on December 21, 2004. The Board also corrected a clerical error in the administrative law judge's decision heading.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMargarita SalasRanch HarvestState Compensation Insurance FundGRO 034460Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings and Awardoccupational group 221industrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ7412203
Regular
Jul 15, 2011

RIGOBERTO GARCIA vs. COLE RANCH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant's industrial injury was caused by a "sudden and extraordinary" event, thereby exempting it from the six-month employment rule for psychiatric injuries under Labor Code section 3208.3(d). The Board corrected a clerical error in the citation of the relevant statute. While the defendant argued the event was an inherent risk of the job, the applicant's uncontradicted testimony provided the only evidence suggesting it was not routine. A dissenting opinion argued that a simple fall from a ladder, without more, should not qualify as extraordinary, especially given the short employment duration and lack of evidence for truly unusual circumstances.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRigoberto GarciaCole RanchState Compensation Insurance FundADJ7412203Opinion and Order Denying Petition for ReconsiderationCorrecting Clerical ErrorFindings and Ordersavocado pickerhigh tree worker
References
Showing 1-10 of 61 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