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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ12014398
Regular
Mar 28, 2025

ROBERT JOLLEY vs. UNITED MECHANICAL, INC.; ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Robert Jolley's petition for reconsideration. Jolley, an applicant, sustained an industrial neck injury in 2019 while employed by United Mechanical, Inc. He filed a third-party negligence lawsuit against The Whiting Turner Contracting Company, which settled. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) found that United Mechanical, Inc. was not negligent and thus entitled to full credit against Jolley's workers' compensation liability from the civil settlement. Jolley challenged this, arguing employer negligence due to constructive notice of hazards and inadequate safety measures. The Appeals Board, adopting the WCJ's report, affirmed that Jolley failed to establish employer negligence, concluding that the employer did not know, nor should have reasonably known, of the dangerous condition prior to the injury.

Third-party creditEmployer negligenceConstructive noticePetition for reconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersLabor CodePermanent partial disabilityTemporary total disabilityCivil lawsuit settlementIncident report
References
Case No. ADJ8610560
Regular
Sep 19, 2013

William Brown (Deceased), Annette Brown vs. SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS

This case involves a widow's petition for workers' compensation death benefits for her truck driver husband who died in a motorcycle accident after leaving work. The administrative law judge denied the claim, finding it barred by the going and coming rule. The applicant argued the special risk exception applied due to hazardous road conditions and a quantitatively greater risk compared to the general public. The majority of the Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the risks were not exclusive to employment.

Going and Coming RuleSpecial Risk ExceptionDeath BenefitsMotor Vehicle AccidentIndustrial InjuryTruck DriverNegligencePublic RoadZone of DangerHazard
References
Case No. ADJ7318651
Regular
Jan 12, 2012

JERRY CHAVEZ, Jr. vs. CITY OF VERNON

This case concerns a police officer diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma who sought workers' compensation benefits under Labor Code section 3212.1's cancer presumption. The applicant presented evidence of industrial exposure to known carcinogens such as diesel exhaust and benzene. The defense failed to rebut the presumption by failing to present evidence that the primary cancer site was identified and that the identified carcinogen was not reasonably linked to the cancer. The Appeals Board affirmed the judge's findings, denying the defendant's petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of VernonJerry Chavez Jr.Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Ruling and Awardcancer presumptionLabor Code section 3212.1industrial exposurecarcinogenic substancesWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ7101808
Regular
Feb 21, 2014

DAVID GREGOR vs. CITY OF HAWTHORNE, Permissibly Self-Insured By ADMINSURE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior decision that disallowed the lien. The WCJ found the lien claimant failed to prove treatment was for an industrial injury and that the defendant successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of industrial causation for the applicant's cancer. The Board agreed that the lien claimant did not present substantial evidence of exposure to a known carcinogen, which is required to invoke the presumption. Therefore, the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof for industrial causation of the cancer.

Labor Code section 3212.1peace officer presumptionindustrial injurycancer causationrebuttable presumptionknown carcinogenoccupational exposuremedical treatment lienworkers' compensationPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ300431 (FRE 0203618) ADJ1896245 (FRE 0203619) ADJ3576423 (FRE 0203620)
Regular
Feb 11, 2014

SHERRILL PERKINS vs. FRESNO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves Sherrill Perkins' claim against Fresno Unified School District for cumulative trauma injuries from classroom hazardous conditions. The Board granted reconsideration after Perkins amended her petition to meet page limitations. While affirming the Administrative Law Judge's findings on most body parts, the Board amended the award to correct the temporary disability rate based on stipulations and to increase the permanent disability rate. The decision also addressed attorney fees and other disputed issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardCumulative TraumaPsyche InjuryRespiratory SystemTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityApportionmentPenalties
References
Case No. ADJ17298965
Regular
Apr 28, 2025

SETH FRANKLIN vs. CITY OF REDLANDS, ADMINSURE

Applicant Seth Franklin, a police officer, sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that denied his claim for industrial injury in the form of melanoma. The WCJ initially found applicant was not entitled to the cancer presumption under Labor Code section 3212.1. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, concluding that the WCJ erred. The Board determined that applicant, as a police officer, was exposed to solar radiation (a known carcinogen) and his melanoma developed or manifested during his employment, thus entitling him to the cancer presumption. The case has been returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine if the presumption can be rebutted.

Labor Code section 3212.1cancer presumptionpolice officermelanomaindustrial injurycarcinogensolar ultraviolet radiationlatency periodrebuttal of presumptioncumulative trauma
References
Case No. ADJ7700512
Regular
Jan 27, 2017

John E. Skaff vs. CITY OF STOCKTON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a decision denying a police officer's claim for prostate cancer. The applicant sought an adverse inference against the City of Stockton for failing to produce Hazard Awareness Recognition Program (HARP) forms allegedly detailing chemical exposures during methamphetamine lab investigations. The Board rescinded the prior decision, returning the case for further development of the record. This is to determine whether the City had a duty to retain and produce the HARP forms, and if the applicant exercised reasonable diligence in seeking them. The Board will then allow the WCJ to decide if an adverse inference is warranted and issue a new decision.

Hazard Awareness Recognition ProgramHARP formsadverse inferenceindustrial causationprostate cancerchemical exposuremethamphetamine labspolice officerQualified Medical ExaminerDr. Juan Cesar Larach
References
Case No. ADJ769963 (VNO 0196669)
Regular
Nov 25, 2013

GEORGE GIO vs. RAY WANG also known as CHING WANG, RAYMOND LLORENS also known as THOMAS STRONG, doing business as RAYMCO BUILDERS, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves an applicant seeking enforcement of a Rehabilitation Unit (RU) determination for vocational rehabilitation benefits and retroactive VRMA, issued on December 31, 2008. The WCJ initially found the WCAB lacked jurisdiction to enforce the RU determination, which was issued after the critical January 1, 2009, deadline for WCAB jurisdiction over such matters. The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's decision because it was improperly made at a Mandatory Settlement Conference over the applicant's objection. The case is remanded for a new hearing before a different WCJ to address the substantive issue of enforceability.

Rehabilitation UnitVocational Rehabilitation Maintenance AllowanceMandatory Settlement ConferenceEnforceabilityJurisdictionRescinded DecisionReassignmentLabor CodeAppeals Board RulesDeclaration of Readiness
References
Case No. SRO 134400, SRO 139130
Regular
Sep 11, 2007

COBY RICHARDS vs. COUNTY OF SONOMA AND G.B. BRAGG AND ASSOCIATES, CITY OF CLOVERDALE AND REMIF

The applicant, a police officer, claimed a cumulative trauma injury resulting in a brain tumor, asserting exposure to x-rays as a known carcinogen under Labor Code section 3212.1. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the finding that the applicant did not establish an industrial injury. While acknowledging the applicant's exposure to x-rays, the Board found this exposure did not present a reasonable link to the brain tumor, as per the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion that only direct radiation to the brain is a known risk factor.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial injuryAstrocytomaBrain tumorCarcinogenLabor Code section 3212.1Presumption of injuryPeace officerCumulative traumaX-rays
References
Showing 1-10 of 76 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