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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ4238124 (LBO 0384459)
Regular
Sep 14, 2012

LUIS ROMERO vs. CEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEM

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision granting the defendant employer a $2,000,000 credit against future workers' compensation liability, representing the applicant's net recovery from a third-party lawsuit. The applicant's petition for reconsideration, arguing employer negligence, was denied. The Board found the applicant failed to prove employer negligence, particularly by not presenting expert evidence on the standard of care or causation. Testimony indicated the applicant was aware of and instructed to use safety equipment (outriggers) but proceeded without it, suggesting applicant's own negligence.

Third-party creditEmployer negligenceCivil lawsuit recoveryManlift operationOutriggersProximate causeStandard of careComparative negligenceWCAB reconsiderationFindings of Fact
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. 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. 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. ADJ7323331
Regular
Aug 06, 2013

TROYNIGEL ROMES vs. ACCOUNT ABILITIS, LUMBERMEN'S UNDERWRITING ALLIANCE

This case involves a lien claimant, Anton Burkley, D.C., who sought reconsideration of an order dismissing his lien claim for failing to pay a required $100 activation fee by the May 21, 2013 deadline. The claimant argued ignorance of the fee requirement, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied his petition. The WCAB affirmed that under Labor Code section 4903.06, failure to pay the activation fee or provide proof of payment results in dismissal with prejudice, and ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Lien activation feeLabor Code section 4903.06WCJPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimCompromise and Releasedock workerindustrial injurypsyche injuryignorance of the law
References
Case No. VNO 0461030
Regular
Nov 30, 2007

CHRISTOPHER MENDEZ vs. GRAY LIFT, INCORPORATED, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a prior award and returned the case for further proceedings to determine the general employer's (Lyon Lift, Inc.) potential liability for the applicant's injury. This is to address whether Lyon had duties under workplace safety laws (Labor Code sections 6400-6404) and if its negligence, if any, contributed to the injury caused by a defective saw provided by the special employer. The Board will then determine if Lyon is entitled to a third-party credit for the applicant's settlement based on its own negligence and established credit principles.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardThird-party creditGeneral employerSpecial employerImputation of negligenceLabor Code sections 6400-6404Workplace safetyPrimary employerSecondary employerDual employment
References
Case No. ADJ7675972
Regular
Jan 07, 2013

Miguel Guzman vs. Girardi & Keese, Angelus Block Company, Inc., Integrated Claims

This case concerns an employer's lien for death benefits paid after an employee's death from an industrial injury. The employee's dependents settled a third-party lawsuit for $445,000, with a portion withheld pending determination of the employer's lien. A Superior Court found it lacked jurisdiction over the employer's reimbursement claim, and the WCJ similarly dismissed the matter, finding no pending workers' compensation issue. The Appeals Board, however, determined it has jurisdiction to adjudicate employer negligence and the amount of the lien, drawing parallels to its authority in credit claims. The matter is returned for trial at the WCAB level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeath BenefitThird-Party ActionEmployer LienReimbursementDeclaratory ReliefSuperior Court JurisdictionCollateral EstoppelLabor Code Section 3856(b)Labor Code Section 3858
References
Case No. ADJ11880536
Regular
Aug 01, 2025

SERGIO AVILA vs. ADVANCED CONSTRUCTION, BITCO/OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORP.

The initial Findings and Order (F&O) from May 8, 2025, granted a credit to defendant Advanced Construction (ACS) from a third-party settlement. Applicant Sergio Avila sought reconsideration, arguing the WCJ erred in calculating ACS's comparative negligence and the total value of his case. The Appeals Board found the F&O lacked definite findings and identified evidentiary gaps concerning the net recovery, the WCJ's reliance on experts, and proof of benefits paid by ACS. Consequently, the Appeals Board rescinded the F&O and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Labor Code section 3861Third-party settlement creditComparative negligenceEmployer negligenceApplicant negligenceTotal damagesNet recoveryAllocation of faultPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Order
References
Showing 1-10 of 5,691 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