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. ADJ9216410
Regular
Dec 28, 2020

RAMON CHACON ALCALA vs. SACRAMENTO COUNTY JAIL

This case involves a Sacramento County Jail inmate, Ramon Chacon Alcala, who claims an industrial injury to his back and groin from lifting dough in the jail bakery. Although the applicant's credibility as a historian was questioned, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopted the findings of the administrative law judge who concluded that medical evidence from examining physicians provided substantial support for an industrial injury. Despite applicant's credibility issues, the physicians' opinions on causation based on reasonable medical probability were deemed sufficient to uphold the award.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjurySacramento County JailInmateBakeryHerniaBack InjuryQualified Medical Examiner
References
0
Case No. ADJ1128865 (VNO 0244369), ADJ1909887 (VNO 0181430)
Regular
Jan 09, 2012

JOE NAVARRO vs. LOCKHEED MARTIN

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision regarding Joe Navarro's claims against Lockheed Martin. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's report, which found Navarro to be an unreliable historian with significant symptom magnification. Consequently, the Board denied injury claims for heart and high blood pressure, and upheld a 27% permanent disability award for a psyche injury, based on the judge's credibility findings.

ADJ1128865ADJ1909887plastic parts fabricatorplastic parts fabricator supervisorcontinuous traumapsyche injurypermanent disabilitynon-industrial apportionmentcredible historiansymptom magnification
References
5
Case No. ADJ3946969
Regular
Nov 28, 2011

GARY GLASGOW vs. RAM CON CO., INC., CIGA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision awarding the applicant 47% permanent disability. The applicant's petition for removal was dismissed as reconsideration was the proper remedy for challenging the final award. The decision affirmed findings that the applicant was not a credible historian and that his claimed neurocognitive deficits were not work-related. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found substantial evidence supported the disability rating based on conflicting medical opinions and video evidence contradicting the applicant's claimed limitations.

WCABReconsiderationRemovalRamcon Co.Inc.CIGALegion InsuranceLiquidationSedgwick CMSPlumbing Foreman
References
0
Case No. ADJ1511860
Regular
Jun 24, 2011

TIBERIO CALDERON MORENO vs. ACV APPRAISAL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petitions for reconsideration. The applicant failed to adequately state grounds for error, instead marking all general grounds for reconsideration. The WCJ found the applicant to be an unreliable historian whose claimed injuries at ACV Appraisal were not supported by medical evidence and were contradicted by prior medical records of pre-existing conditions. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which highlighted the applicant's poor credibility and lack of medical evidence linking his current conditions to the alleged employment injury.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersWCJindustrial injuryherniaback injurypsychesexual dysfunctionsleep disorder
References
1
Case No. AHM 0093643
Regular
Nov 07, 2007

RUBEN DE LA TORRE vs. ST. JUDE HOSPITAL; Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) finding that the applicant was not credible and did not sustain an injury arising out of and in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The ALJ's report, which the Board adopted, emphasized the applicant's lack of credibility, failure to disclose pre-existing conditions, and the credibility of defense witnesses and medical evidence. The Board gave great weight to the ALJ's credibility findings.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportApplicant CredibilityInjury AOE/COEPermissibly Self-InsuredWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Pro PerFindings & OrderMedical Evidence
References
1
Case No. ADJ6688237
Regular
Jun 10, 2013

Celina Acevedo vs. William Sanchez-Barrera, UEF

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision that found applicant Celina Acevedo was not an employee of William Sanchez-Barrera. The Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) credibility finding against the applicant was central to the decision. The ALJ found the applicant's testimony regarding her employment and the severity of her claimed injury lacked credibility, while the defense witness's testimony was deemed credible. Therefore, the board adopted the ALJ's report and recommendations.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCredibility FindingEmployment RelationshipHousekeeperInjury AOE/COEWitness TestimonyEmployment RecordsApplicant Credibility
References
1
Case No. ADJ10153514 ADJ10605281
Regular
Sep 30, 2019

ROBERTO CARDENAS vs. SANTA ISABEL ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a VALLARTA, SAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant alleging a specific injury to his right wrist, hand, and shoulder from a machine malfunction. The original Findings and Orders denied the claim, finding the applicant not credible, particularly due to discrepancies with a First Aid and Injury Notice. The Appeals Board rescinded this decision, finding that the WCJ failed to address the credible testimony of a eyewitness. The matter was returned for further proceedings to clarify evidence and credibility issues.

ADJ10153514ADJ10605281ROBERTO CARDENASSANTA ISABEL ENTERPRISESVALLARTASAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANYHAZELRIGG CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESWORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDOPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONFindings and Orders
References
5
Case No. ADJ10843290
Regular
Aug 21, 2018

MANUEL SOLIS vs. DECORE-ATIVE SPECIALTIES, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found that while an injury occurred, the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. This decision was based on the WCJ's credibility determinations, which found the applicant's testimony regarding reporting the injury to his employer to be not credible. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's observations of witness demeanor, finding no substantial evidence to warrant overturning these credibility findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ Credibility DeterminationsStatute of LimitationsLachesTimely Reporting of InjuryMachine OperatorRight Shoulder InjuryRight Arm InjurySpecific Injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ8186548
Regular
Jan 10, 2014

JOSE GONZALEZ TORRES vs. GREAT WALL SEAFOOD CORPORATION, TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, CNA CLAIMS PLUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge. The applicant's claim was denied based on inconsistent testimony and a lack of credible evidence establishing an employment relationship. Defense witnesses, including the company's general manager and secretary, credibly testified that the applicant was not an employee on the date of the alleged injury. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility findings, which were supported by substantial evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.employee statusloader/unloaderinconsistent testimonydeposition testimonywitness testimony
References
1
Case No. ADJ7442025
Regular
May 16, 2012

LENNIE WIDEN vs. IN HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that the applicant sustained a specific left shoulder injury in February 2009 based on her credible testimony and medical evidence. The Board affirmed the WCJ's credibility findings and also admonished defense counsel for failing to cite the record properly. The defendant's arguments regarding medical determinations, credibility, post-termination issues, and laches were rejected.

In Home Supportive ServicesState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.WCAB Rule 10842(b)home care providerleft shoulder injuryFebruary 2009credibility determination
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 1,738 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