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. GOL 96757
Regular
Jun 10, 2008

SA YANG LO vs. CUSTOM SENSORS & TECHNOLOGIES, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a prior award, upholding the application of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule. The Board found that exceptions allowing for the 1997 Schedule did not apply, as the applicant's temporary disability indemnity extended beyond January 1, 2005, and no qualifying pre-2005 reports indicated permanent disability. Furthermore, the Board found the applicant's vocational expert's opinion regarding diminished future earning capacity unpersuasive, thus affirming the initial 9% permanent disability rating.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSA Yang LoCustom Sensors & TechnologiesInc.State Compensation Insurance FundGOL 96757Opinion and Order Denying ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ12080314
Regular
Aug 26, 2019

VICTORIA TRUJILLO vs. CHEVRON, BROADSPIRE

Applicant seeks reconsideration of an order approving a compromise and release for $\$ 25,000.00$ for bilateral wrist, hand, and finger injuries. Applicant contends the settlement was underpaid and did not reflect the negotiated agreement. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as premature because no evidence was presented to support the applicant's claims regarding the payment dispute. The matter is remanded for a hearing to create a record for the WCJ to determine if good cause exists to set aside the compromise and release.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and Releasebilateral wristsbilateral handsbilateral fingersbusiness analystlump sum paymentnegotiated settlement agreementunderpaid settlement proceeds
References
Case No. VNO 0509254
Regular
Apr 17, 2008

CAROL LEVENSON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a claim for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus allegedly caused by noise exposure during firearms training. The Appeals Board found the opinion of the Agreed Medical Evaluator, Dr. Grossan, to be substantial evidence, concluding that the applicant's conditions were not work-related. Consequently, the Board denied the applicant's claim for hearing loss and tinnitus, awarding only reimbursement for medical-legal liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalTemporary DisabilityFindings and AwardLicensing Program AnalystBilateral Hearing LossFirearms TrainingShooting RangeTinnitusQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)
References
Case No. ADJ8590622
Regular
Mar 16, 2017

MICHAEL BAKER vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES; Permissibly SelfInsured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of Los Angeles' petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the finding that applicant Michael Baker sustained an industrial cumulative trauma injury to multiple body parts, including hearing loss and skin disorders, over his employment as a police officer. The defendant's attempt to raise the issue of separate dates of injury under Labor Code section 5412 for these conditions for the first time at trial was deemed waived. This failure to timely raise the issue prevented the applicant from responding and was not adequately addressed in pre-trial statements.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Los AngelesPermissibly Self-InsuredMichael BakerIndustrial cumulative trauma injuryPolice officerBilateral hearing lossTinnitusCervical spineLumbar spine
References
Case No. ADJ 7941996
Regular
Apr 26, 2016

ROBERTO ALVAREZ vs. LINK STAFFING, INC., ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a disputed lien dismissal where the lien claimant's representative allegedly falsified hearing minutes to obtain the rescission of a dismissal order. The Appeals Board dismissed the employer's petition for reconsideration because the rescission order was not a final decision. However, the Board granted removal due to serious allegations of misconduct, remanding the case to the WCJ for an evidentiary hearing on whether the representative appeared, tampered with records, or made false statements. The WCJ is also tasked with making findings and recommendations on potential sanctions under Labor Code section 5813.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLien DismissalPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalMinutes of HearingFraudMisconductSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813
References
Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ2738569 (LAO 0759524) ADJ553488 (LAO 0759510)
Regular
Oct 29, 2010

CONNIE ALVIZO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, Permissibly Uninsured, Adjusted By STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the applicant's entitlement to 24/7 home health care. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and emphasized that the defendant failed to submit the primary treating physician's request for this care to mandatory utilization review. Citing *Sandhagen*, the Board affirmed that Labor Code § 4610 utilization review is the sole mechanism to challenge medical treatment requests. Therefore, the defendant's failure to follow this process bars their current challenge to the 24/7 home health care.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardConnie AlvizoDepartment of Industrial RelationsPermissibly UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Orderhome health care24 hour/7 days per weeksenior legal stenographer
References
Case No. ADJ3496977 (AHM 0123782) ADJ4522580 (AHM 0123784) ADJ285268 (AHM 0123786) ADJ3502821 (AHM 0123784)
Regular
May 24, 2010

CARL DIXON vs. PHILLIPS BUICK, PONTIAC & MAZDA, CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration sua sponte due to the WCJ's failure to make an express finding on the date of injury in one case and contradictory findings in others despite party stipulations. The Board also rescinded the decision concerning utilization review as it conflicted with current case law. Due to significant procedural and substantive defects in the applicant's petition, including improper filing and a non-attorney preparing the document without disclosure, the Board is providing notice of its intention to impose sanctions on applicant's counsel. The matters are returned to the trial level for further proceedings and decision.

WCABReconsiderationJoint Findings Award and OrderBody shop technicianIndustrial injuryLow backLeft shoulderBilateral wristsBilateral handsPetition for reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ16783938; ADJ16778187
Regular
Aug 28, 2025

Polly Mark Dizon vs. Spears Manufacturing Company, Zurich San Francisco

Applicant Polly Mark Dizon filed applications for cumulative and specific injuries. The Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) issued a Findings and Order (F&O) requiring additional Qualified Medical Examination (QME) panels, which the defendant opposed. Defendant filed a Petition for Removal, arguing they would suffer substantial prejudice. The Appeals Board granted the Petition for Removal, finding that due process was violated as no evidentiary record was made, and the Minutes of Hearing were unclear. Consequently, the May 24, 2024 F&O was rescinded, and the matter returned to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with the Board's opinion.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Examinationsubstantial prejudiceMinutes of HearingOrdered Off CalendarFindings and OrderHearing LossHeadachesNeurologyAudiology
References
Case No. ADJ1923835 (LBO 0337936) ADJ611957 (LBO 0367126)
Regular
May 04, 2009

ESTHER OVALLE vs. CITY OF GARDENA, CORVEL CHINO

In ADJ1923835, the WCJ found no permanent disability from a specific injury to applicant's right shoulder and wrists on October 16, 2000. In ADJ611957, the WCJ awarded 56% permanent disability for a cumulative trauma injury to bilateral shoulders and wrists ending November 16, 2000. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing Dr. Craemer's IME opinion was not substantial evidence, particularly regarding the left shoulder injury's timing and apportionment. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's reliance on Dr. Craemer's opinion that all permanent disability stemmed from the cumulative trauma. A clerical error in the cumulative trauma date was also corrected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEsther OvalleCity of GardenaCorvel ChinoADJ1923835ADJ611957Petition for ReconsiderationClerical ErrorPermanent DisabilitySpecific Injury
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,955 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