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. ADJ8915327
Regular
Apr 22, 2015

MARIA HERNANDEZ vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES, INC., ESIS

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Warehouse Demo Services, Inc. and ESIS regarding an award of total temporary disability (TTD) to applicant Maria Hernandez. The defendants argued the award was unsupported by evidence regarding Hernandez's ability to drive or perform modified duty while experiencing dizziness. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. The WCAB also admonished defense counsel for improperly citing and attaching an unadmitted deposition. The WCJ found applicant's testimony credible, supported by medical reports indicating dizziness and inability to drive or work safely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportADJ8915327deniedPaul E. ZayatGrancell Standerdeposition10842Lynn Devine
References
Case No. ADJ6561833
Regular
Aug 19, 2011

Stephen Resetar vs. CONSTRUCTORA AMORA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a worker, Stephen Resetar, who sustained a physical injury to his spine after falling from a ladder. Resetar also claimed a psychological injury, but had been employed for less than six months. Labor Code § 3208.3(d) generally bars compensation for psychiatric injuries in such cases unless caused by a "sudden and extraordinary employment condition." The Appeals Board found that Resetar's fall, caused by dizziness and falling from a ladder, did not qualify as a sudden and extraordinary event. Therefore, Resetar's claim for psychiatric injury is barred, and reconsideration is granted to reflect this decision.

Labor Code § 3208.3(d)psyche injurysudden and extraordinary employment conditionsix-month employment rulereconsiderrescindcompensable injuryfall from ladderdizzinessdehydration
References
Case No. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Case No. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ2253765 (VNO 0561741)
Regular
Mar 17, 2017

MAKE NEHDAR vs. WASHINGTON MUTUAL, INC., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns a clerical error in a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The applicant, Mike Nehdar, sought to correct the description of injured body parts in a May 16, 2013 Opinion and Order. The original WCAB decision had rescinded a previous administrative law judge's finding and substituted its own. The applicant correctly identified a clerical error in the substituted finding regarding the specific body parts injured. The WCAB granted reconsideration to correct this clerical error, affirming its prior decision but amending the finding to accurately reflect the applicant's claimed injuries.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeCumulative TraumaInjury AOE/COEClerical ErrorPetition to Correct Clerical ErrorLower ExtremitiesNeurological
References
Case No. GOL 86641, GOL 99800
Regular
Aug 07, 2008

MIGUEL TORRES vs. HENDRY TELEPHONE PRODUCTS, CONNECTICUT INDEMNITY/ROYAL & SUNALLIANCE INSURANCE, HR3 STAFFING SERVICES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to correct errors in the original award, specifically the misidentification of employers and their insurers. The WCAB rescinded the prior award and returned the case for further proceedings to determine the existence of a cumulative injury and clarify employer liability. The Board also noted that Connecticut Indemnity's policy likely constitutes "other insurance," thus precluding CIGA's involvement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoint Findings and AwardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryNeckRight Upper ExtremityCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCubital Tunnel SyndromeHeadachesDizziness
References
Case No. ADJ6820021, ADJ6820115, ADJ6820640, ADJ6820664
Regular
May 11, 2012

GENOVEVA AYALA vs. WARNER BROTHERS

This case involves Genoveva Ayala's workers' compensation claims against Warner Brothers for multiple injuries. The Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) found some injuries to be established but excluded applicant's medical evidence regarding neurological and internal injuries due to alleged procedural violations. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the applicant should have an opportunity to obtain admissible medical reports through the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) process, as defendants allegedly interfered with this process. Consequently, the issue of neurological and internal injuries is deferred for further evaluation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGenoveva AyalaWarner BrothersPermissibly Self-InsuredJoint Partial Findings of FactOrders and Notice of Intention to Appoint Regular PhysicianWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)orthopedic injurycumulative traumaneurological system
References
Case No. MON 0340665
Regular
Jul 02, 2008

DANIEL EARL PETERSON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, legally uninsured and adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further develop the record, specifically ordering a formal sleep study. This action rescinded the previous award because the medical evidence presented regarding the applicant's sleep disturbance was deemed unsubstantial, lacking a formal sleep laboratory diagnosis as required by AMA Guides. The Board also noted potential correct contentions by the defendant regarding indemnity rates and overlapping temporary and permanent disability payments.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAgreed Medical EvaluatorAMESleep StudyPermanent DisabilityFindings and AwardReconsiderationSubstantial Medical EvidenceEpworth Sleepiness ScaleAMA Guides
References
Case No. ADJ7948448
Regular
Nov 03, 1971

HENRY LOPEZ vs. WINDSOR SNF MANAGEMENT, TOWER SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant who, while on a work assignment, experienced a diabetic episode causing dizziness. He stopped at a nearby market to eat and subsequently slipped and fell, injuring his hip and knee. The employer argued the injury was outside the scope of employment due to a deviation and the going and coming rule. However, the WCJ found the deviation was reasonable under the personal comfort rule for a known medical condition, and the Appeals Board adopted this reasoning, denying reconsideration. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings and resolved reasonable doubts in favor of the employee, consistent with precedent.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeCredibility FindingInjury to left hip and left kneeDiabetic episodeLow blood sugarDeviation from work assignmentGoing and coming ruleInsbexual evidence
References
Case No. ADJ8254774
Regular
Aug 16, 2013

SANJAY KUMAR vs. GILMAN COLLISION REPAIR, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves applicant Sanjay Kumar's petition for reconsideration of a denial of his workers' compensation claim. The administrative law judge (WCJ) found that Kumar failed to prove an industrial injury to his shoulder, hip, and thigh. This decision was based on conflicting testimony, specifically a coworker's account that the bumper was already removed and Kumar did not report pain, and the employer's testimony that Kumar cited dizziness from medication rather than an injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding that Kumar did not meet his burden of proof due to the lack of credible evidence supporting his claim.

industrial injuryPetition for ReconsiderationWCJburden of proofpreponderance of the evidencecredibilitydemeanor of witnessescollision repair technicianleft shoulderleft hip
References
Showing 1-10 of 10 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