Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ11396782

Regular

Apr 17, 2018

SALVADOR RODRIQUEZ-GOMEZ vs. CONTROL AIR CONDITIONING CORPORATION

In *Rodriguez-Gomez v. Control Air Conditioning Corporation*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal. Removal is an extraordinary remedy, granted only if substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result without it, and reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy. The Board found that the applicant failed to demonstrate either of these conditions were met, and therefore denied the petition.

RemovalPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJAdministrative Law JudgeExtraordinary RemedyFinal Decision

References

Case No. ADJ9381507

Regular

Jun 18, 2014

MICHAEL PERRY vs. KAPPL HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY, APPLIED RISK SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the defendant in the case of Michael Perry v. Kappl Heating and Air Conditioning. The denial was based on the defendant's violation of Appeals Board Rules regarding the attachment of extraneous documents and exceeding the page limit for their petition. Furthermore, the Board found no good cause to set aside the Compromise and Release agreement, leading to the petition's outright denial.

Petition for ReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10842Appeals Board Rule 10845Compromise and Releaseapplicant fails to state good causedeny reconsiderationWCABADJ9381507Van Nuys District Office

References

Case No. OXN 0128545 OXN 0132143

Regular

Mar 28, 2008

DONALD GEORGE vs. KAISER AIR CONDITIONING AND SHEET METAL, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Kaiser Air Conditioning's petition for reconsideration. The Board previously rescinded a dismissal of a lien claim, favoring a hearing on the merits despite the lien claimant's non-appearance and the defense's sympathetic arguments. The Board reiterated that the decision was limited to the specific facts of this case, allowing for separate proceedings against the lien claimant's counsel for their conduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKaiser Air Conditioning and Sheet MetalGAB Robins North AmericaPetition for ReconsiderationDecision after ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantFailure to AppearGood CauseCompromise and Release

References

Case No. ADJ7243550

Regular

May 14, 2018

GWEN CONDIT vs. PANAMA BUENA VISTA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an administrative law judge's decision that denied an applicant's petition to reopen for new and further disability. The judge erred by applying a psychiatrist's apportionment of non-industrial factors to the applicant's entire permanent disability rather than only to the increased disability. This misapplication led to an incorrect finding that the applicant's total disability was less than the previously stipulated award. The Board rescinded the judge's decision and returned the matter for further proceedings to correctly redetermine all issues related to the petition.

Petition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilityStipulated AwardApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorPsychiatric InjuryPermanent DisabilityGAF ScoreWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board

References

Case No. ADJ10488034

Regular

May 07, 2018

GILDO BEITIA vs. CITY OF OAKLAND

Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for removal, upholding an administrative law judge's order that limited the defendant's subpoenas for medical records. The defendant argued this order denied due process and improperly restricted discovery into non-industrial conditions affecting the applicant's alleged injuries. The WCAB found the subpoenas were impermissibly overbroad under existing precedent, which limits discovery to matters directly relevant to the claimed injuries. A dissenting opinion argued the limitations were too restrictive, especially for conditions like weight gain and hypertension which can have numerous causes.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalSubpoena Duces TecumMotion to QuashCompensable Consequence InjuriesDiscovery LimitationsPatient-Litigant ExceptionPhysician-Patient PrivilegeOverbroad SubpoenaDue Process

References

Case No. ADJ2346178 (VNO 0504730) MF ADJ862555 (VNO 0504735)

Regular

Jul 31, 2014

REBECCA DUARTE vs. MOTION PICTURE \& TV FUND, Permissibly Self-Insured, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case concerns an applicant's 1990 specific industrial injury that caused temporary total disability from August 2004 to September 2010. The defendant argued that the injury could not have caused this later period of disability as the applicant had returned to work and her condition was previously deemed permanent and stationary. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed its prior decision, finding that the 1990 injury did contribute to the temporary disability period. The Board relied on medical opinions stating the specific injury and a later cumulative trauma both contributed to the applicant's condition. The court clarified legal precedent, holding that prior return to work or permanent and stationary declarations do not preclude liability for subsequent temporary disability if the original injury is a contributing factor.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMotion Picture & TV FundZurich North AmericaSpecific Industrial InjuryTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent and StationaryQualified Medical ExaminerCumulative TraumaTemporary Disability IndemnityApportionment

References

Case No. ADJ3623428 (MON 0334798) ADJ1196230 (MON 0334799)

Regular

Feb 08, 2010

FREDERICK DOMINGUE vs. CEDAR SINAI MEDICAL CENTER

Defendant Cedar Sinai Medical Center sought reconsideration of an approved Compromise and Release (C&R) for $99,000, settling applicant Frederick Domingue's claims for various injuries, including psyche, respiratory, and cancer. Defendant argued CMS approval was a condition precedent, applicant failed to disclose terminal brain cancer, and the WCJ abused discretion due to applicant's death post-execution but pre-approval. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding no evidence CMS approval was required given the C&R's terms and CMS guidelines, and that the WCAB has discretion to approve a C&R even after an applicant's death. Furthermore, the Board found no sufficient evidence of nondisclosure of a separate terminal brain cancer condition.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseMedicare Set AsideCMS approvalcondition precedentindustrial injurypsycherespiratory systemspine

References

Case No. ADJ880264 (AHM 0133336)

Regular

Apr 19, 2017

DANIEL MEDINA vs. CONTROL AIR CONDITIONING, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration and rescinded the dismissal of his case. The dismissal was deemed a violation of due process because the applicant did not receive adequate notice that his case would be dismissed based on his personal appearance at the June 26, 2017 trial or his alleged lack of participation. The WCAB found that the original Notice of Intention to Dismiss was solely based on failure to appear at the May 15, 2017 trial, and the applicant's request for an opportunity to be heard on these issues was improperly denied. Consequently, the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, ensuring the applicant's right to a fair hearing.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissal of CaseNotice of Intention to DismissDue ProcessFailure to AppearAttorney Calendaring ErrorReport and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation JudgeWCABFindings of Fact

References

Case No. ADJ2212207 (STK 0188509)

Regular

Dec 17, 2008

Burl Gene Condit vs. CITY OF MODESTO, Permissibly Self-Insured

In this case, the applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award that significantly reduced his permanent disability benefits due to apportionment based on prior injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the trial judge erred by placing the burden on the applicant to prove lack of overlap. The Board clarified that under Labor Code section 4664, the defendant bears the burden of proving that prior permanent disability overlaps with the current disability. Consequently, the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings on the issue of overlap.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code Section 4664Prior AwardsOverlapBurden of ProofKopping v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

References

Case No. ADJ9942537

Regular

Dec 09, 2018

ANGELO RIOS vs. RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING, INSURANCE CO OF THE WEST SAN DIEGO

This case involves an applicant seeking workers' compensation benefits for an injury sustained during his unpaid lunch break. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the prior decision that denied the claim. The Board found that the applicant's injury did not fall under the "going and coming" rule due to evidence that he was performing work-related tasks during his break, including taking work calls and researching for a bid. Furthermore, the Board determined the injury likely occurred after the unpaid lunch period concluded, extending into a paid break.

Going and coming ruledual purpose exceptioncourse of employmentscope of employmentAOE/COEpersonal comfort doctrinepaid breaksunpaid lunch breakassaultthird-party assault

References

Showing 1-10 of 900 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ11396782

Regular

Apr 17, 2018

SALVADOR RODRIQUEZ-GOMEZ vs. CONTROL AIR CONDITIONING CORPORATION

RemovalPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJAdministrative Law JudgeExtraordinary RemedyFinal Decision

References

Case No. ADJ9381507

Regular

Jun 18, 2014

MICHAEL PERRY vs. KAPPL HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY, APPLIED RISK SERVICES, INC.

Petition for ReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10842Appeals Board Rule 10845Compromise and Releaseapplicant fails to state good causedeny reconsiderationWCABADJ9381507Van Nuys District Office

References

Case No. OXN 0128545 OXN 0132143

Regular

Mar 28, 2008

DONALD GEORGE vs. KAISER AIR CONDITIONING AND SHEET METAL, GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA

References

Case No. ADJ7243550

Regular

May 14, 2018

GWEN CONDIT vs. PANAMA BUENA VISTA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT

Petition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilityStipulated AwardApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorPsychiatric InjuryPermanent DisabilityGAF ScoreWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board

References

Case No. ADJ10488034

Regular

May 07, 2018

GILDO BEITIA vs. CITY OF OAKLAND

References

Case No. ADJ2346178 (VNO 0504730) MF ADJ862555 (VNO 0504735)

Regular

Jul 31, 2014

REBECCA DUARTE vs. MOTION PICTURE \& TV FUND, Permissibly Self-Insured, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

References

Case No. ADJ3623428 (MON 0334798) ADJ1196230 (MON 0334799)

Regular

Feb 08, 2010

FREDERICK DOMINGUE vs. CEDAR SINAI MEDICAL CENTER

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseMedicare Set AsideCMS approvalcondition precedentindustrial injurypsycherespiratory systemspine

References

Case No. ADJ880264 (AHM 0133336)

Regular

Apr 19, 2017

DANIEL MEDINA vs. CONTROL AIR CONDITIONING, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

References

Case No. ADJ2212207 (STK 0188509)

Regular

Dec 17, 2008

Burl Gene Condit vs. CITY OF MODESTO, Permissibly Self-Insured

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code Section 4664Prior AwardsOverlapBurden of ProofKopping v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

References

Case No. ADJ9942537

Regular

Dec 09, 2018

ANGELO RIOS vs. RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING, INSURANCE CO OF THE WEST SAN DIEGO

Going and coming ruledual purpose exceptioncourse of employmentscope of employmentAOE/COEpersonal comfort doctrinepaid breaksunpaid lunch breakassaultthird-party assault

References

Showing 1-10 of 900 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.