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. ADJ1622633 (VEN 0115623)
Regular
May 15, 2012

SALVADOR CONTRERAS vs. M&C FARM LABOR, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, INTERCARE PASADENA, PAULA INSURANCE

This case involves Salvador Contreras's petition to reopen his workers' compensation claim for new and further disability. The original claim was venued in Ventura/Oxnard, but Contreras filed his reopen petition in Los Angeles. The WCJ denied the petition based on former WCAB Rule 10390, which required filing in the proper district office and did not excuse non-compliance for filing in an incorrect office. The Court of Appeal, however, reversed this decision, holding that current WCAB Rule 10397, which allows filing in any office, applied as a procedural change. The Court also found that even under former Rule 10390, Contreras demonstrated excusable neglect, thus compelling the WCAB to grant reconsideration and return the case for a decision on the merits.

RemittiturPetition to ReopenStatute of LimitationsLabor Code 5410Labor Code 5804WCAB Rule 10390WCAB Rule 10397Excusable NeglectNew and Further DisabilityCourt of Appeal
References
12
Case No. ADJ7516108
Regular
Jun 06, 2011

ANGELICA CROTTE vs. UFO, INC., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, VIRGINIA SURETY COMPANY, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Virginia Surety's petition for removal because it was unverified, violating WCAB Rule 10843(b). The WCAB also noted the petition's excessive length and improper attachments, which violated multiple rules, including CA Rule 10232(a)(10) and WCAB Rule 10842(c). Based on these egregious violations, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to impose a $500 sanction on Virginia Surety's counsel, Sophia E. Martinez, pursuant to Labor Code section 5813.

Petition for RemovalUnverified PetitionWCAB RulesLabor Code 5813SanctionsFrivolousWillful Failure to ComplyWCJAdministrative Law JudgeVirginia Surety Company
References
1
Case No. ADJ2065496 (LAO 0777249) ADJ4050189 (LAO 0774705)
Regular
Jan 21, 2010

MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY/FOOD 4 LESS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

In this case, the defendant appealed a Rehabilitation Unit Determination, but their appeal was deemed untimely and improper by the WCJ. The defendant argued that filing a Declaration of Readiness (DOR) with their petition was not required and that the governing WCAB Rule was invalid. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, holding that the defendant's appeal was indeed untimely and improper under the then-current WCAB Rule 10955, which mandated the filing of a DOR for such appeals. The Board also upheld the validity of WCAB Rule 10955, confirming the Board's authority to establish procedural rules.

Rehabilitation UnitDeclaration of ReadinessWCAB Rule 10955Labor Code section 4645Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Factuntimely appealadministrative law judgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRalphs Grocery Company
References
1
Case No. ADJ6502775, ADJ6498620, ADJ8109003, ADJ8115890
Regular
May 09, 2014

MARIA POHYAR vs. DEY LP, AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the challenged order was not a "final order" subject to reconsideration. The WCAB also denied the Petition for Removal, agreeing with the Administrative Law Judge that the issue of whether the defendant Zurich is entitled to a new Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel was only before the WCJ based on a procedural rule regarding appointment notification forms, not ex parte communications. The WCAB clarified that issues of ex parte communications and the applicability of related statutes and rules were not yet properly before the Board. Therefore, the applicant's request for the WCAB to assert jurisdiction and rule against Zurich on the QME panel issue was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalJurisdictionQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Panel QMEDivision of Workers' Compensation (DWC) RulesLabor Code section 4062.3Ex parte communicationMedical Director
References
7
Case No. ADJ7628890
Regular
Jan 03, 2020

ELIZA ARRIAGA vs. CALIFORNIA TRUCK EQUIPMENT COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a petition for reconsideration by Eliza Arriaga, who sought to overturn a dismissal of her workers' compensation claim. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, upholding the dismissal based on WCAB Rule 10582 for lack of prosecution. The Board found the applicant's attorney's arguments misplaced and confirmed the dismissal was appropriate under Rule 10582, not the rule cited by the applicant. The WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's report in its entirety.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportWCAB Rule 10582dismissallack of prosecutionnotice of intention to dismissRoth v Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.WCAB Rule 10562failure to appear
References
2
Case No. ADJ3447287 (SBR 0263874) ADJ3565604 (ANA 0306676) ADJ3955433 (ANA 0306675)
Regular
Dec 09, 2016

PATSY HENDRY vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITAL, PERMISSIBLY SELF INSURED

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition to disqualify a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCAB found that the alleged expressions of opinion by the WCJ did not demonstrate bias or an unqualified opinion as to the merits of the case, but rather reflected rulings based on evidence and law. The board also clarified that erroneous rulings do not constitute grounds for disqualification. Furthermore, the WCAB concluded that the petition, while not subject to strict timeliness rules due to the timing of the alleged events, was still ultimately denied on its merits.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJCode of Civil Procedure section 641formed or expressed an unqualified opinionexistence of a state of mindenmity against or bias towardTaylor v. Industrial Acc. Com.Lumbermen's Mut. Cas. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.Kreling v. Superior CourtMcEwen v. Occidental Life Ins. Co.
References
7
Case No. ADJ10492342
Regular
Apr 27, 2023

JASMINE ORBERG vs. INTER SOURCES, INC., STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a prior decision, finding applicant Jasmine Orberg was an employee of Inter Sources, Inc. at the time of her injury. The WCAB determined that Orberg's activities in the training program, including interacting with customers and providing status updates, established an employer-employee relationship under the Borello standard. Furthermore, the WCAB ruled that the "going and coming" rule did not bar her claim because the employer provided transportation, which falls under an exception to the rule. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on other issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardInternshipMotor Vehicle AccidentGoing and Coming RuleEmployer-employee relationshipBorello standardIndependent contractorPrima facie caseAgencyProvided transportation
References
18
Case No. ADJ8560542
Regular
Oct 17, 2016

SAMUEL LARA vs. DIAMOND RESTAURANT MANAGEMENT, AMERICAN CLAIMS SAN DIEGO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claimant's lien based on a failure to file a Notice of Representation (NOR) under WCAB Rule 10774.5. The WCAB found that because the rule became effective after the lien claimant initially appeared, a new NOR was not required when an employee of their representative appeared. Therefore, the WCAB rescinded the dismissal order and returned the matter for further proceedings.

WCAB Rule 10774.5Notice of RepresentationLien ClaimantAR Jureidini DowneyWilliam EspinozaOrder Dismissing LienPetition for ReconsiderationAgencyEmployee RepresentativeWCJ
References
1
Case No. ADJ 9547788, ADJ 9771745, ADJ 9805683
Regular
Mar 24, 2016

MARTIN TORTOLEDO vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Martin Tortoledo. The dismissal was based on the petitioner's failure to comply with WCAB Rule 10842(b), which requires specific citations to the record to support evidentiary statements. The WCAB emphasized that this rule mirrors appellate court requirements and that litigants cannot shift the burden of searching the record to the Board. Had the petition not been dismissed procedurally, the WCAB would have denied it on the merits as per the WCJ's report.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportWCAB Rule 10842(b)specific references to the recordappellate proceedingswaiver of pointburden of discoveryADM_CASE_NO_ADJ9547788ADM_CASE_NO_ADJ9771745
References
6
Case No. ADJ7445107
Regular
Oct 13, 2025

JILLIAN DIFUSCO vs. HANDS ON SPA, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE GROUP

The Appeals Board, en banc, granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision regarding disclosure requirements for defendants. The WCJ had ruled that the defendant only needed to disclose the name of its insurance carrier as per WCAB Rule 10390. The Board determined that its prior en banc decisions, Coldiron I and II, are binding precedent and require defendants to disclose all entities liable for payment and any insurance policy provisions affecting liability. Consequently, the WCJ's Findings of Fact and Order were rescinded, and the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with this comprehensive disclosure mandate.

En Banc DecisionWCAB Rule 10390Coldiron IColdiron IIDiscovery RequestInsurance Carrier DisclosureSelf-Insured RetentionLarge DeductibleEntity Liable for CompensationThird-Party Administrator
References
25
Showing 1-10 of 10,470 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