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. ADJ240116 (OXN 0145413)
Regular
May 03, 2010

Veronica L. Olejniczak vs. Airport Chevron, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns applicant Veronica Olejniczak's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award for a 1997 injury. The applicant argued for permanent total disability based on chronic pain and inability to compete in the labor market, citing medical opinions. The Board affirmed the original award, finding the WCJ correctly applied the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule, which mandates the use of the AMA Guides for impairment ratings. The Board clarified that diminished ability to compete in the open labor market is no longer a factor under current law, with earning capacity now being assessed via a statutory formula.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityReconsiderationFindings and AwardLumbar SpineCervical SpineBilateral KneesChronic PainPsychiatric DisabilityApportionment
References
1
Case No. ADJ6743543
Regular
Mar 10, 2011

TERESA RODEZNO vs. CORONA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration for both applicant and defendant, rescinded the prior Findings and Award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found that the medical expert's opinion on permanent disability was not substantial evidence because it relied on an outdated "ability to compete in the open labor market" standard instead of diminished future earning capacity. Permanent disability, apportionment, and attorney fees were deferred, with the trial judge to obtain a new medical report consistent with current legal standards. The Board otherwise affirmed the judge's decision, noting that applicant's contentions would be addressed on remand.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentReconsiderationFindings and AwardDiminished Future Earning CapacityOgilvie AnalysisAMA GuidesSubstantial EvidenceQualified Medical Examiner
References
0
Case No. SDO 0238430
Regular
Aug 04, 2008

GILBERT VALADEZ vs. COFFMAN SPECIALTIES, CALIFORNIA GUARANTEE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, BROADSPIRE, CRAWFORD COMPANY, CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the previous denial of the applicant's Petition for New and Further Disability. The WCJ erred by focusing on the applicant's motivation to work rather than his actual ability to compete in the open labor market. The case is returned for further proceedings to address the applicant's claim of permanent total disability based on unrebutted vocational expert testimony.

Petition for ReconsiderationNew and Further DisabilityPetition to ReopenPermanently Totally DisabledLeBoeuf analysisopen labor marketvocational rehabilitationdiminished ability to competeunrebutted expert testimonysubstantial evidence
References
3
Case No. SFO 0479038
En Banc
Oct 26, 2005

JACK C. STRONG vs. CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

This en banc decision holds that Labor Code section 4664 requires apportionment of overlapping permanent disabilities from prior awards, even when involving different body regions. It establishes that the defendant must prove the prior award exists, after which the disability is conclusively presumed to exist, and the burden shifts to the applicant to disprove that the old and new disabilities overlap in their effect on the ability to compete and earn.

SB 899Labor Code section 4664apportionmentpermanent disabilityoverlapping disabilitiesprior awardconclusively presumedburden of proofrebuttable presumptionunique factors of disability
References
54
Case No. ADJ2786471 (AHM 0131183)
Regular
Feb 12, 2013

RENEGARCIA vs. CITY OF ANAHEIM, PRESSURE

The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award due to the physician's flawed methodology in determining permanent disability. The physician improperly used the *Almaraz/Guzman* analysis by considering both functional capacity and ability to compete in the labor market. Furthermore, the physician's supplemental report failed to correct this error and used speculative cumulative losses. The matter is returned for a new rating strictly applying the AMA Guides.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of AnaheimRene GarciaReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardPermanent DisabilityCumulative TraumaLeft KneeRight KneeBack Injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ1 44848 (GRO 0032874)
Regular
Apr 26, 2016

BILLY BRANHAM vs. ARROYO GRANDE GLASS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board rescinded the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) decision granting a 63% permanent disability award. This was because the WCJ improperly rejected the vocational expert's opinion regarding the impact of industrial medications on the applicant's ability to compete in the labor market. The Board remanded the case for further development of both medical and vocational records, specifically requesting updated opinions on the side effects of the applicant's medications. This is to ensure a more thorough investigation into the cognitive effects of prescribed drugs on the applicant's work capacity.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetition to ReopenPermanent Disability AwardVocational ExpertCognitive EffectsIndustrially-Prescribed MedicationsMedical Record DevelopmentApportionmentDiminished Future Earning Capacity
References
8
Case No. ADJ1704477 (FRE 0179942)
Regular
Jul 20, 2010

DON L. KETTERING vs. DME ELEC AND FIRE PROTECTION, INTERCARE CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION FRESNO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order to develop the record was not a final decision. The Board also denied the applicant's alternative Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm justifying this extraordinary remedy. The WCJ had previously reopened the case but required further medical opinion evidence to establish the applicant's disability and its impact on their ability to compete in the labor market. The applicant contended that existing medical opinions were sufficient for a 100% disability award, but the Board found no basis for this claim.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderMedical Opinion EvidenceRecord DevelopmentAgreed Medical ExaminerPermanent DisabilitySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmLabor Code section 5900
References
5
Case No. ADJ1003643
Regular
Oct 05, 2010

CHERYL HANSEN-DILLARD vs. SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered By PEGASUS RISK MANAGEMENT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior Findings, Award, and Orders, remanding the case for further development of the medical record. The primary issue was the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) impairment rating for the applicant's right knee. The Board found the AME's opinion did not constitute substantial medical evidence because it improperly incorporated the applicant's ability to compete in the open labor market and work restrictions into the impairment determination, which is contrary to the AMA Guides and current law. Further proceedings are required to obtain a proper impairment rating that adheres to legal standards.

Permanent DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorAMA GuidesSubstantial Medical EvidenceReconsiderationFindings Award and OrdersWCJDeep Vein ThrombosisOrthopedist
References
7
Case No. ADJ600916 (SDO 0348725)
Regular
Apr 06, 2020

DAVID GWIN vs. TOYOTA LIFT, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded the prior award and remanded the case for further development of the record. The applicant appealed a $66\%$ permanent disability rating, arguing his diminished future earning capacity was greater due to an inability to benefit from vocational rehabilitation. The Board found that the original record was insufficient to determine if the applicant's medication side effects impacted his ability to work in the open labor market or engage in vocational rehabilitation. Further medical and vocational evaluations are required to address these issues before a final determination can be made on the disability rating.

Permanent Disability RatingDiminished Future Earning CapacityVocational RehabilitationReconsiderationMedical EvaluatorsOpen Labor MarketCrush InjuryOsteomyelitisChronic PainMajor Depressive Disorder
References
2
Case No. ADJ2786471 (AHM 0131083) ADJ1723308 (AHM 0131186) ADJ1776217 (AHM 0131184)
Regular
Jul 12, 2011

RENE GARCIA vs. CITY OF ANAHEIM

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior decision regarding applicant Rene Garcia's industrial injury to his low back and knees. The Board found that the treating physician's impairment rating was not substantial evidence because it impermissibly considered the applicant's ability to compete in the open labor market, in addition to Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), deviating from *Almaraz/Guzman* guidelines. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including a supplemental report or deposition from the physician, to clarify the *Almaraz/Guzman* analysis solely on ADLs.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Anaheimfirefightercumulative traumapermanent disability awardapportionmentAMA GuidesAlmaraz v. Environmental Recovery ServicesMilpitas Unified School Dist. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Whole Person Impairment
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 635 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