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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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. ADJ7630224
Regular
Nov 29, 2012

TINA SPERBER vs. LAW OFFICES OF LISA M. PACIONE

This case involves Tina Sperber's workers' compensation claim against her employer, Law Offices of Lisa M. Pacione. The applicant, a legal assistant, sustained an injury while investigating a property related to a case, claiming implied authorization. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant was not a credible witness regarding her authority. The Board agreed that the applicant lacked permission for the investigation and that the information gathered provided no benefit to the defendant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDenying ReconsiderationLegal AssistantLaw OfficesInvestigationImplied AuthorizationCredibilityBenefit to DefendantFamily Law ProceedingsAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ8427623, ADJ8580402, ADJ8944197
Regular
Oct 05, 2016

DANNY MCCARTY vs. DC CONCRETE, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought reconsideration of an order approving a Compromise and Release (C&R), alleging mutual mistake regarding the calculation of permanent disability advances (PDAs). The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding no mutual mistake as the parties agreed to the settlement amount and the PDA offset was explicitly stated in the C&R. The Board determined that the defendant's later discovery of a miscalculation constituted a unilateral mistake, not a mutual one, and therefore did not warrant setting aside the approved C&R.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationMutual MistakeUnilateral MistakePermanent Disability AdvancesPDA OffsetAdministrative Law JudgeWCJ ReportMeeting of the MindsNegotiate Settlement
References
Case No. ADJ2909110, ADJ3237633, ADJ2742182, ADJ1950432, ADJ9347288
Regular
Jul 14, 2014

ROBERTO HERNANDEZ vs. PRG PARKING MANAGEMENT, LLC, CHUBB SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendants' Petition for Reconsideration. The defendants sought to rescind a Compromise and Release agreement, claiming a mutual mistake of fact regarding permanent disability advances. However, the Board found that the defendants' mistake in calculating the advances was unilateral, not mutual. Therefore, good cause to rescind the agreement was not shown, and reconsideration was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCompromise and ReleaseMutual Mistake of FactUnilateral MistakePermanent Disability AdvancesRescissionMandatory Settlement ConferenceOrder Approving Joint C&R
References
Case No. ADJ2140586
Regular
Sep 01, 2009

ARMANDO AVILA-GONZALEZ vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

The Appeals Board reversed a WCJ's decision to reopen a case, finding no "good cause" based on a purported change in law. The WCJ had relied on the *Vera* case to apply an older disability rating schedule, but subsequent appellate decisions created a conflict, not a definitive change, in the law. The Board determined *Vera* remained citable and that the evidence did not support reopening or a finding of permanent disability. Therefore, the applicant's petition to reopen was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetition to ReopenGood CauseChange in LawVera v. WCABPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleLabor Code Section 4660(d)Permanent and Stationary StatusMedical Reports
References
Case No. ADJ10102441
Regular
Jul 20, 2016

MARTHA ALAS vs. WOOD RANCH BARBECUE & GRILL, SENTRY INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Sentry Insurance's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior award based on a stipulated average weekly wage. Sentry argued the stipulation was based on a mutual mistake of fact regarding the calculation of the applicant's average weekly wage. The Board found no mutual mistake, as both parties agreed to the figure, and Sentry's subsequent realization of error was unilateral. Therefore, good cause to set aside the stipulation and award was not established.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeAverage Weekly WageStipulationMutual Mistake of FactGood CauseTemporary Total DisabilityAttorney's Fees
References
Case No. ADJ6690678
Regular
May 24, 2012

PEDRO RAMIREZ vs. PCL CONSTRUCTION, RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT

In **Ramirez v. PCL Construction**, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's Petition for Removal. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge, finding no basis to grant the removal. Notably, the WCAB clarified that the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) is not involved, and therefore, a reference to "other insurance" in the judge's report was disregarded. The decision effectively upholds the status quo of the case as determined by the administrative law judge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalWCJ ReportDenying RemovalCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAOther InsuranceAdministrative Law JudgeLabor LawIndustrial Accident
References
Case No. ADJ7467289
Regular
Nov 30, 2012

RONALD ROBINSON vs. METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, JT2 INTEGRATED

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that good cause did not exist to set aside a Compromise and Release agreement. The Administrative Law Judge found the defendant's claimed mutual mistake was unilateral, stemming from the defendant's own oversight in failing to notice the applicant's unsigned Addendum A and signing the agreement without the applicant's signature. The defendant's argument of mutual mistake regarding the scope of the settlement and a prior stipulation was insufficient to warrant setting aside the agreement. The Board also admonished the defendant for submitting unnecessary documents, violating a procedural rule.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationMutual MistakeUnilateral MistakeFraudDuressUndue InfluenceStipulation and AwardCumulative TraumaAddendum A
References
Case No. ADJ10067186
Regular
Jun 06, 2019

MICHAEL BEDIG vs. CANTRELL'S COMPUTER SALES AND SERVICE, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY

This case concerns Michael Bedig's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined Bedig sustained injury to his neck and left upper extremity, resulting in 20% permanent disability and a specific weekly indemnity rate. Bedig sought to overturn this, arguing the ALJ erred by relying on stipulated earnings from a pre-trial conference statement, which he claimed were entered into by mistake and that his actual earning capacity should have been used. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding that Bedig had repeatedly stipulated to his earnings and indemnity rate, failed to object to these stipulations at trial or subsequently, and did not demonstrate sufficient grounds to set aside a unilateral mistake.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgePermanent DisabilityStipulationsPre-trial Conference StatementEarnings CapacityAverage Weekly WageIndemnity Rate
References
Showing 1-10 of 5,823 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