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. ADJ8330411
Regular
Jul 07, 2017

LARRY SINGLETARY vs. PARAMOUNT PICTURES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Paramount Pictures' petition for reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision. Paramount argued the ALJ erred by applying a 50% WPI for the applicant's right lower extremity, instead of 30%, based on conflicting reports from an agreed medical examiner. The ALJ found the evidence insufficient to prove the applicant could walk more than a "block" without a walker, which was the key factor in the different WPI ratings. The WCAB gave great weight to the ALJ's credibility determinations and found no substantial evidence to overturn them.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedWCJCredibility determinationsGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Permanent disabilityWPIRight lower extremityOrthopedic AMESpecific date of injury
References
Case No. ADJ9183350
Regular
Nov 02, 2016

MEGAN PRELL vs. CEDAR FAIR, L.P. dba as KNOTT'S BERRY FARM, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the original permanent disability rating of 2% was insufficient. The Board adopted the Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator's (PQME) finding of 15% Whole Person Impairment (WPI), applying the *Almaraz-Guzman* doctrine. This doctrine allows physicians to use clinical judgment, drawing upon the entire AMA Guides, to more accurately reflect an injured employee's impairment. The applicant's continued symptoms, post-surgery, and MRI findings supported the PQME's higher impairment rating.

WCABPERMANENT DISABILITYWHOLE PERSON IMPAIRMENTWPIAMA GUIDESALMARAZ-GUZMANPQMEORTHOPEDIC SURGERYLEFT SHOULDER INJURYINDUSTRIAL INJURY
References
Case No. ADJ7816317, ADJ8290118
Regular
Apr 08, 2013

CANDY AMAYA vs. ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL

In two consolidated workers' compensation cases, both the applicant and defendant sought reconsideration of findings of permanent disability. The Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) admitted error in awarding 21% permanent disability for each of two left wrist injuries, conceding that the correct impairment should have been 6% Whole Person Impairment (WPI), translating to a 10% overall permanent disability award. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original awards, and returned the matters to the trial level for redetermination of permanent disability. The Board took no position on issues of vocational expert rebuttals or cost recovery, allowing them to be raised in further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityVocational ExpertScheduled DisabilityReconsiderationFindings and AwardsWPIAMA GuidesApportionment
References
Case No. ADJ9500046
Regular
Jun 26, 2025

NADINA WARE vs. SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) sought reconsideration of an Amended Findings and Award, where the WCJ found applicant Nadina Ware's combined injuries resulted in permanent total disability and eligibility for SIBTF benefits. SIBTF contended the findings lacked specific detail on eligibility requirements, insufficient contemporaneous evidence of prior disability, and that medical and vocational reports were not substantial evidence. The Appeals Board rescinded the decision, finding the Amended Findings and Award lacked specific findings and explanation for the conclusion of permanent total disability, and that the medical examiners did not adequately assign Whole Person Impairment (WPI) for all pre-existing conditions. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundSIBTFPermanent Total DisabilityPre-existing DisabilitiesApportionmentWhole Person ImpairmentWPIAMA GuidesSubstantial Medical EvidenceVocational Consultant
References
Case No. ADJ7369877, ADJ7369872
Regular
Jan 20, 2016

SAMUEL DEBONE vs. CEMEX, INC., AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, INC., GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to correct errors in a previous permanent disability rating. The WCJ incorrectly applied the Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) WPI ratings, conflating cervical and lumbar spine impairments and miscalculating lower extremity to WPI conversions for the hips. The case is returned to the trial level for a new rating based on correct WPI values and to clarify the basis for any departure from AMA Guides ratings. The apportionment of disability was found to be correct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Cumulative TraumaCervical SpineLumbar SpineHipsDRE Method
References
Case No. ADJ6820873
Regular
Oct 29, 2010

Thomas Wong vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES/LAPD, TRISTAR 29106 GLENDALE

Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of Los Angeles' petition for reconsideration of an award for an injured police officer. The defendant contended the WCJ erred in adopting the PQME's whole person impairment (WPI) ratings for hypertension and cardiomyopathy, and in finding the defendant failed to rebut the diminished future earning capacity (DFEC) component. The Board affirmed the WCJ's reliance on Dr. Carlish's WPI ratings, finding them supported by the AMA Guides and substantial evidence. Furthermore, the Board found the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof to rebut the scheduled DFEC rating, as their arguments lacked sufficient evidentiary support.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryHypertensionHypertensive Heart DiseaseCardiomyopathyWhole Person Impairment (WPI)AMA GuidesDisability Evaluation SpecialistDiminished Future Earning Capacity (DFEC)Ogilvie v. City and County of San Francisco
References
Case No. ADJ7555409
Regular
Mar 04, 2014

JESUS ESCANUELA vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, legally uninsured, adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration and dismissed the applicant's untimely petition. The WCAB found that the Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) opinion regarding psychiatric permanent disability was not supported by substantial evidence, as it did not properly address causation under the current PDRS. Consequently, the case is remanded to the trial level for further development of the record concerning psychiatric permanent disability. The WCAB deferred the issue of permanent disability and attorney's fees pending this further development.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJesus EscanuelaCalifornia Department of Correctionslegally uninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ7555409Fresno District OfficeOpinion and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ6671476
Regular
Nov 15, 2016

DEBORAH PAINE vs. CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves a dispute over a 15% reduction in permanent disability indemnity under Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(a). The defendant, City of Sebastopol, argued the applicant's prior treating physician's reports did not definitively establish maximum medical improvement, thus negating their obligation to make an estimate of permanent disability before offering modified work. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the defendant was indeed entitled to the reduction, as the medical reports lacked a specific WPI rating and relied on physician judgment. Consequently, the permanent disability award was reduced by 15%.

Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(a)permanent disability indemnityreconsiderationFindings and Awardstipulated injuryprimary treating physicianqualified medical examinationpermanent and stationary statusoffer of regular workmedical reports
References
Case No. ADJ1078163, ADJ3341185
En Banc
Sep 03, 2009

MARIO ALMARAZ, JOYCE GUZMAN vs. ENVIRONMENTAL RECOVERY SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, MILPITAS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

This en banc decision clarifies that a permanent disability rating established by the Schedule is rebuttable, but any evidence to rebut the Whole Person Impairment (WPI) component must be based within the four corners of the AMA Guides.

AlmarazGuzmanWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boarden bancprecedentAMA Guides2005 Schedulepermanent disabilityrebuttableprima facie evidence
References
Case No. ADJ3013559 (GRO 0033660)
Regular
Dec 09, 2009

MIGUEL OLIVA vs. PASO ROBLES ELECTRIC, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the October 5, 2009, decision, and returned the matter for further proceedings to determine applicant's disability, clarifying the use of the AMA Guides.

Almaraz/Guzman IOgilvie I2005 PDRSrebuttalAMA GuidesDFECvocational expertAMElumbar spinepermanent disability
References
Showing 1-10 of 113 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