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. ADJ473373 (ANA 0406381)
Regular
Feb 10, 2012

FERNANDO GUTIERREZ vs. SOCAL FRAMING aka BMHC; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE, administered by ESIS, INC.

This case concerns applicant's claim for extended temporary disability (TD) benefits beyond 104 weeks due to a left eye injury. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of the "amputation" exception, ruling that the surgical removal of an eye does not fit the statutory definition. However, the Board remanded the case for further development of the record on the "high-velocity eye injury" exception, as the velocity and force of the object that struck the applicant's eye were unclear. The applicant's Petition for Removal was dismissed as reconsideration was the appropriate remedy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFernando GutierrezSoCal FramingBMHCACE American InsuranceESISInc.ADJ473373ANA 0406381Opinion and Decision
References
Case No. ADJ2023774
Regular
Feb 07, 2011

CHRISTOPHER CORBO vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

This case concerns whether an applicant's severe crush injury to his left foot, involving a partial avulsion of the heel pad, constitutes an "amputation" under Labor Code section 4656(c)(3)(C) for purposes of extending temporary disability indemnity. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, affirming its prior decision that the injury did not meet the definition of amputation. The Board clarified that "amputation" requires severance or removal of a limb or appendage, not merely a severe laceration or partial separation of tissue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 4656(c)(3)(C)AmputationTemporary DisabilityCrush InjuryAvulsionHeel PadCalcaneusCruz v. Mercedes-Benz of San Francisco
References
Case No. LAO 829404, LAO 815773
Regular
Jul 20, 2007

LOLONDRA McCOY vs. AVIATION SAFEGUARDS aka COMMAND SECURITY, KEMPER GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a previous award of vocational rehabilitation benefits. The Board found no substantial evidence to support the applicant's claim that her diabetes, left leg amputation, or right toe amputation were industrially caused, despite the treating physician's opinion. The case was remanded to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify industrial causation for the specific body parts claimed as injured.

Vocational RehabilitationIndustrial CausationDiabetesAmputationQMETreating DoctorCompromise and ReleaseThomas FindingContinuous TraumaLabor Code section 5908.5
References
Case No. MON 297119
Regular
Apr 01, 2008

EDMUND BURNS, Jr. vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

This case concerns a police officer who sustained an industrial injury to his right foot after stepping on a foreign object, which, due to his pre-existing diabetes, led to a gangrenous infection and amputation. The defendant argued for apportionment of the permanent disability to the applicant's diabetes, but the Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision. The medical evidence indicated that the amputation would not have occurred absent the industrial injury, thus establishing industrial causation for the entire permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentPre-existing DiabetesCausationEscobedo v. MarshallsSenate Bill 899Qualified Medical ExaminerTreating Physician
References
Case No. SAL 0107786
Regular
Oct 16, 2007

MOLLY KIRKPATRICK vs. DOMINICAN SANTA CRUZ HOSPITAL, PSI ADMINISTERED BY OCTAGON RISK SERVICES

This case concerns an injured worker who had cervical spine surgery involving diskectomy, vertebrectomy, decompression, and fusion. The defendant sought reconsideration of an award granting temporary disability benefits beyond the statutory 104-week limit, arguing the surgery was not an amputation. The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award and returned the matter for further proceedings, as the definition of "amputation" in precedent excludes internal body parts like those removed during spinal fusion.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDominican Santa Cruz HospitalOctagon Risk ServicesMolly KirkpatrickIndustrial InjuryCervical Spine SurgeryTemporary Disability IndemnityLabor Code Section 4656(c)AmputationDiskectomy
References
Case No. LAO 854789
Regular
Oct 09, 2007

Juana Manriquez vs. KENVIN, INC., dba CORDOVAN & GREY LTD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant sought extended temporary disability benefits, claiming a rotator cuff debridement during shoulder arthroscopy constituted an "amputation" under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C). The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that "debridement" of an internal body part, like bone, does not meet the statutory definition of amputation. This definition requires the severance or removal of a limb or body appendage, conforming to the common understanding of the term.

Juana ManriquezKenvin IncState Compensation Insurance FundLAO 854789Petition for ReconsiderationAugust 6 2007 Findings and Ordershoulder arthroscopyamputationLabor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C)temporary disability
References
Case No. SAL 0116965
Regular
Nov 06, 2007

Valentine Ushakoff vs. MONTEREY GOURMET FOODS, SENTRY CLAIMS COMPANY, SENTRY CLAIMS SERVICE

The applicant sought reconsideration, arguing a total disk replacement constituted an amputation and thus entitled them to extended temporary disability benefits beyond the 104-week limit. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the surgery was not an amputation under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C), as it involved internal body parts. The Board deferred issues regarding credit for overpayment of temporary disability and an EDD lien for further determination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationindustrial injuryroute driverthoracolumbar spineCharité total disk replacementamputationLabor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C)temporary disability indemnitydeferred issues
References
Case No. SDO 0354449
Regular
Sep 20, 2007

ADAM PERRY vs. HAMMOND \& MASING CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior award denying additional temporary disability payments beyond the statutory 104-week limit. The applicant sought to extend payments based on his knee surgeries, arguing they constituted "amputations" under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C). The Board held that the term "amputation" in this context refers to the severance of external body parts, not the surgical removal of internal knee fragments or cartilage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryPsyche InjuryTemporary Total DisabilityLabor Code Section 4656(c)(1)Labor Code Section 4656(c)(2)(C)AmputationsOsteochondral FragmentChondroplastyACL Reconstruction
References
Case No. SAL 110279
Regular
Oct 19, 2007

KENNETH LANGWORTHY vs. SANTA CRUZ COMMUNITY COUNSELING CENTER, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a worker's claim for extended temporary disability benefits beyond the statutory two-year limit. The applicant argued his spinal discectomy constituted an amputation, entitling him to longer benefits under Labor Code section 4656. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that a discectomy is not an amputation under the relevant statute, citing a prior en banc decision. Therefore, the applicant's right to temporary disability benefits terminated on April 2, 2007, after the two-year statutory cap.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKenneth LangworthySanta Cruz Community Counseling CenterState Compensation Insurance FunddiscectomyamputationLabor Code section 4656temporary disability benefitstwo-year capindustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ9365173
Regular
Jun 19, 2017

MARIA LOPEZ vs. GENERAL WAX CO. INC., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the finding of permanent total disability for the applicant. The applicant sustained admitted industrial injuries including a partial finger amputation, hypertension, gastrointestinal issues, and a psychiatric injury. The Board found that the finger amputation constituted a "violent act" under Labor Code section 4660.1(c), making the applicant's psychiatric impairment compensable. The defendant's arguments regarding stale medical records and insufficient vocational expert analysis were rejected due to lack of proper citation and contradictory evidence in the record.

AOE/COEPermanent Total DisabilityPsychiatric InjuryLabor Code 4660.1(c)Violent ActCatastrophic InjuryVocational ExpertApportionmentSubstantial Medical EvidencePetition for Reconsideration
References
Showing 1-10 of 48 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