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. VNO 0510561, VNO 0510562
Regular

JANIS RUSH vs. CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The defendant, State Compensation Insurance Fund, petitioned for removal to amend an order closing discovery to allow a deposition, but the petition was denied. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found the petition contained irrelevant information, suggesting it was partially plagiarized from another case. Crucially, the Board determined the closure of discovery would not cause significant prejudice or irreparable harm to the defendant.

petition for removalagreed medical evaluatorclosure of discoverysignificant prejudiceirreparable harmWCAB Rule 10843Report and Recommendationworkers' compensation administrative law judgeDENYING REMOVALCALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
References
Case No. VNO 0508480
Regular
Dec 06, 2007

MICHELLE LORD vs. RITE-AID CORPORATION, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an award for home health care, finding the original decision lacked substantial evidence. The Board rescinded the award and returned the case for further development of the record concerning the applicant's past and future home health care needs. Specifically, the Agreed Medical Examiner must clarify their opinion on the reasonableness and necessity of past and future home health care.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRite-Aid CorporationSt. Paul TravelersMichelle LordFindings and AwardReconsiderationHome health careIndustrial injuryAgreed Medical ExaminerActivities of Daily Living
References
Case No. ADJ8878991
Regular
Jan 31, 2014

JAY SCHETTLER vs. ALLIED BEVERAGES, INC.; CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of the administrative law judge's finding of injury. The applicant, a route salesman, claimed he stepped on glass, injuring his left foot, which was corroborated by medical records showing a cut and the applicant's delayed awareness due to diabetic neuropathy. Defense witness testimony also supported the applicant's claim of cutting his toe at work. The Board found the applicant's testimony credible and the medical evidence sufficient to establish the injury arose out of and in the course of employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Factterritory route salesmanmechanism of injurydiabetic neuropathycredibilitymedical recordsReport and Recommendationurgent care
References
Case No. ADJ9664450
Regular
Jun 05, 2015

PATRICIA AGUILAR vs. HARRIS RANCH BEEF COMPANY, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This case concerns an applicant's petition for removal regarding discovery of her past sexual history in a workers' compensation claim for psychiatric injury due to sexual harassment. The Appeals Board granted removal, finding the applicant's past sexual history is constitutionally protected and that the defendant failed to demonstrate good cause for discovery under Labor Code section 3208.4. The Board limited discovery to medical records relevant to the applicant's psychiatric history, allowing the defendant to refile a petition for further discovery upon a proper showing of good cause after a medical evaluation. This decision aims to balance the applicant's right to privacy with the defendant's need for relevant information concerning causation and apportionment.

Labor Code section 3208.4Petition for RemovalFindings of Fact and OrderDepose applicantSexual harassmentSexual assaultMolestationGood causePrivacyPsyche injury
References
Case No. ADJ9958753 ADJ9958758
Regular
Jul 29, 2019

Raul Medrano vs. Stalwork, Inc., Everest National Insurance Co., American Claims Management, Inc., State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves a workers' compensation claim for injuries sustained by a carpenter. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found no substantial medical evidence and ordered the record to be developed. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, overruled the defendant's objection to applicant's exhibits to allow the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) to review them, and affirmed the order for further record development. The Board found this necessary to ensure substantial justice and allow the QME to review critical medical records for proper adjudication.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJAOE/COEQMESubstantial Medical EvidenceDevelop the RecordAdmissibility of ExhibitsMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ8831581
Regular
Oct 07, 2013

DARLEEN DE LUNA vs. BUFFALO WILD WINGS, INC.; THE HARTFORD, Adjusted By SEDGWICK CLAIM MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involved an applicant injured while taking out trash. The defendant employer sought reconsideration of an award finding the injury industrial, arguing the applicant was engaged in horseplay and misrepresented facts. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant's injury was industrial. The Board deferred to the judge's credibility assessment, finding the applicant credible and the witness alleging horseplay not so. Even if the applicant rode the cart, it was considered performance of authorized work in an unauthorized manner, not disqualifying horseplay.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial injuryPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardExpediterHorseplayWitness credibilityMaterial fact misrepresentationTrash cartCurb-cut
References
Case No. ADJ8349042
Regular
Nov 25, 2019

CARLOS REYES vs. PALM DESERT DOORS AND HARDWARE, PRAETORIAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to review a WCJ's finding that the employer did not engage in serious and willful misconduct. The WCAB rescinded the original decision, finding material factual discrepancies between the WCJ's findings and the evidence, particularly regarding the necessity of gloves and the feasibility of using a safety guard. The case is remanded for further proceedings, including allowing the applicant to amend their petition to include theories based on OSHA violations and presenting arguments and evidence on that issue. The WCAB also clarified that failure to specifically plead OSHA violations in the pretrial conference statement does not constitute a waiver of the right to raise such issues.

Serious and Willful MisconductLabor Code section 4553Occupational Safety and HealthCal/OSHAWCJFindings and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and Releasetable sawsafety guard
References
Case No. ADJ9381403
Regular
Oct 09, 2015

FILICIANA QUINTERO vs. PBC HOLDING CORPORATION dba COMMERCIAL CLEANING SYSTEMS, STARR INDEMNITY AND LIABILITY COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board found the petition to be skeletal and unsupported by specific record references or legal authority. The applicant's request to further develop the medical record was also denied, as discovery closed at the mandatory settlement conference, and she had ample opportunity to cure evidentiary deficiencies prior to trial. The Board adopted the judge's reasoning that the applicant failed to meet her burden of proof and acted contrary to her own interests.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationSubstantial Medical EvidencePanel Qualified Medical ExaminerWCJ Report and RecommendationLabor Code § 5902Labor Code § 5502(d)(3)Mandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery Cut-offFurther Medical Record Development
References
Case No. ADJ3190249 (SFO 0500553)
Regular
Mar 24, 2010

Quintella Eutsey vs. CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal, dismissing the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board found the prior administrative law judge's order improperly limited discovery into the applicant's psychiatric injury claim. The Board rescinded the previous order, allowing further deposition to explore the applicant's full medical history relevant to her psyche claim, as this is discoverable when a psychological injury is at issue. Both parties were admonished to conduct themselves professionally during future discovery.

removalpetition for reconsiderationdiscovery disputepsyche injurydeposition testimonyright lower extremityindustrial injurypersonal lifefamily lifepast history
References
Case No. ADJ2453702 (LAO 0773585)
Regular
Aug 26, 2010

JOSE CALDERAS vs. ECOLOGY CONSTRUCTION, INC., CIGA THROUGH ITS SERVICING FACILITY, CAMBRIDGE FOR FREMONT COMPENSATION, IN LIQUIDATION

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration and removal of a Workers' Compensation Judge's order rescinding a prior decision. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as the order was not a final decision. Furthermore, the petition for removal was denied because the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board also found CIGA's initial petition for reconsideration to be timely filed.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalRule 10859Order of RescissionFinal OrderDiscovery Cut OffJurisdictionSubstantive RightsIrreparable HarmExtraordinary Remedy
References
Showing 1-10 of 92 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