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. 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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ7837345
Regular
Jun 28, 2012

CAESAR ALCORDO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration of a decision regarding Caesar Alcords' claim against the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and State Compensation Insurance Fund. The WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's report, which denied reconsideration. The key issue concerned custodial duties under Labor Code 3212.2, which the Board clarified is not limited to employees whose duties are *primarily* custodial.

WCABLabor Code 3212.2custodial dutiescorrectional employeesPetition for Reconsiderationdenial of reconsiderationReeves v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.workers' compensation administrative law judgeADJ7837345Sacramento District Office
References
Case No. ADJ8318725
Regular
Mar 25, 2014

JUDITH CASEY vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, Legally Uninsured, Adjusted By STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the finding that the applicant, an office technician, sustained an industrial heart injury. This was based on the determination that the applicant performed custodial duties, as defined by Labor Code section 3212.2 and relevant case law. Such duties included supervising inmates, managing their work and conduct, and accounting for equipment, which qualified her for the presumption of industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJudith CaseyState of California Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8318725Findings of Fact and Awardsindustrial injuryheart and cardiovascular systemcustodial duties
References
Case No. ADJ7426008
Regular
May 02, 2016

JOE TUCKER vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition for reconsideration filed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the administrative law judge (WCJ), which found that Joe Tucker, a Plumber II at Corcoran State Prison, was entitled to the heart presumption under Labor Code § 3212.2. The WCJ determined that Tucker's duties supervising inmate work crews, which involved daily threats and exposure to dangerous conditions, constituted "custodial duties" within the meaning of the statute. The WCAB specifically excluded certain paragraphs from the WCJ's report from incorporation in its order.

Labor Code § 3212.2heart presumptioncustodial dutiesPlumber IIinmate work crewscorrectional officersadministrative segregationsecurity housinginmate threatsextraction squad
References
Case No. ADJ7464646
Regular
Apr 24, 2017

DONALD THOMPSON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and increased the applicant's permanent disability award from 22% to 52%. This decision stemmed from the Board's finding that the applicant's hypertension constituted "heart trouble" under Labor Code section 3212.2, a presumption applicable to Department of Corrections employees with custodial duties. Consequently, the hypertension-related disability is not subject to apportionment, unlike the prior award which had applied apportionment. The applicant, a teacher at a correctional facility, is thus entitled to an unapportioned award for his industrial injury.

Labor Code § 3212.2presumption of injurycustodial dutiesheart troubleapportionmenthypertensioncoronary heart diseaseindustrial injurypermanent disabilityLabor Code § 4663(e)
References
Case No. ADJ9572711
Regular
May 20, 2019

RENE HINOJOSA vs. NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition and granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the original finding of injury to the psyche and cardiovascular system, including hypertension, but amended the award. Crucially, the Board found that Labor Code section 3212.2 applied due to the applicant's custodial duties, thus precluding apportionment of permanent disability for hypertension and cardiovascular disease under Labor Code section 4663(e). This resulted in an increased permanent disability rating of 73% and entitlement to a life pension.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Orders and Awardstationary engineerpsyche injurycardiovascular systemhypertensionheart trouble presumptionLabor Code Section 3212.2Labor Code Section 4663(e)
References
Case No. ADJ7850439
Regular
Oct 15, 2012

Edgar Tabo vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT

The applicant, a police officer, injured himself in an off-duty bicycle crash. The Board denied compensation because the applicant failed to establish that his subjective belief of needing to train for an optional bicycle patrol course was objectively reasonable. His off-duty recreational activity did not meet the requirements for an exception to the exclusion for such injuries under Labor Code section 3600(a)(9). Therefore, the applicant takes nothing by way of his claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEdgar TaboCity and County of San Francisco Police DepartmentPermissibly Self-InsuredADJ7850439Oakland District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJindustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ7816135
Regular
May 07, 2012

BRYAN FLICKER vs. COUNTY OF BUTTE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the administrative law judge's (WCJ) finding of industrial injury for a correctional lieutenant. The WCJ had applied Labor Code section 3213.3, which presumes lower back impairments in peace officers required to wear duty belts. The Board found insufficient evidence that the applicant was required to wear a duty belt as a condition of employment as a peace officer, which is a prerequisite for the presumption's application. Therefore, the Board rescinded the award and returned the case for a determination of industrial injury without reference to the duty belt presumption, allowing for further record development.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBryan FlickerCounty of ButteADJ7816135Labor Code section 3213.3correctional lieutenantcumulative injurylow back impairmentpeace officerduty belt presumption
References
Case No. ADJ1543782 (VNO 0540728)
Regular
May 27, 2009

Richard E. Knudsen vs. CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing a previous decision that denied benefits for a police officer's shoulder injury. The Board found the injury sustained in the on-duty gym was industrial because the applicant's belief that working out was expected was objectively reasonable, given the employer provided gym facilities and allowed officers to stay overnight for safety and duty readiness. The injury is now considered a compensable industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Beverly Hillspolice officeroff-duty injuryindustrial injuryreasonable expectancypersonal comfort doctrineexertional injurygym workoutpremises
References
Case No. ADJ10713529
Regular
Nov 30, 2017

MARIA SOSA vs. CINTAS CORPORATION, TRAVELERS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award finding applicant entitled to temporary total disability. The Board found insufficient evidence regarding applicant's specific job duties and whether they conflicted with the agreed medical evaluator's work restrictions. Therefore, the case is returned to the trial level for further development of the record, specifically for the AME to review a detailed job analysis. This is to determine if applicant could have continued her usual and customary duties but for her termination for cause.

Temporary total disabilityPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Work restrictionsTermination for causeJob dutiesFurther proceedingsDevelop the recordModified work
References
Showing 1-10 of 435 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