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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Esposito v. N. Y. S. Willowbrook State School

Claimant, a food service worker at Willowbrook State School, contracted acute infectious hepatitis after a brief employment period in July 1969. The Workmen’s Compensation Board awarded disability, which was upheld by a prior decision filed in March and amended in July 1971. The court on appeal noted the lack of proof that the claimant was exposed to specific infected patients, despite infectious hepatitis being endemic at the school. While the disease can be an occupational disease for hospital employees, an award requires proof of exposure during employment. Due to brief employment and inadequate medical testimony, the court found the conclusion of contracting the disease during employment to be speculative. The decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board was reversed, and the matter remitted for further proof on causal relation.

Occupational DiseaseInfectious HepatitisCausal RelationWorkers' Compensation AppealMedical Evidence InsufficiencyExposure RiskState School EmploymentDisability AwardRemittiturAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. ADJ8906863
Regular
Feb 17, 2023

YURI MARKEVITCH vs. HITACID GLOBAL STORAGE TECHNOLOGY, TOKIO MARINE and FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a Legionnaires' disease claim. The applicant contracted the disease during a business trip abroad, which was deemed to have arisen out of and in the course of employment. The Board found the applicant was exposed to a special risk due to travel, distinguishing this case from prior precedents involving non-infectious diseases. Therefore, the Board upheld the compensability of the applicant's injury.

AOE/COELaTourette v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.course of employmentarise out of employmentcommercial traveler ruleinfectious diseasespecial exposurerisk of communitymedical expert opinionLegionella Pneumonia
References
9
Case No. ADJ8454395
Regular
Jul 26, 2018

HEATHER BRENT vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION, legally uninsured, adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a prior award finding applicant sustained injury AOE/COE resulting in Lyme disease. The Board found the primary treating physician's report insufficient to constitute substantial medical evidence. Conflicting medical opinions exist, and the report from the agreed medical evaluator was deemed unpersuasive. The case is remanded for further proceedings, potentially appointing an infectious disease specialist to further develop the medical record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationApplicantDefendantInjury AOE/COELyme diseasePrimary Treating Physician (PTP)Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Norman PantingM.D.
References
12
Case No. ADJ9895453
Regular
Aug 21, 2017

SIR WALTERS (Dec'd), AMORN WALTERS (Widow) vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded an earlier award. The WCAB found that the death certificate alone was insufficient substantial medical evidence to establish the cause of the decedent's death, specifically concerning whether it was due to an industrial injury, a blood-borne infectious disease, or MRSA. Therefore, the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and development of the record. The issue of the applicable statute of limitations remains deferred pending this further evidence.

Valley FeverCoccidioidomycosisCocci meningitisMRSACorrectional officerDeath benefitsStatute of limitations240-week limitation420-week limitationLabor Code 3212.8
References
17
Case No. ADJ4676639
Regular
Dec 24, 2013

RONALD HODGES vs. CHEVRON OVERSEAS PETROLEUM, INC.

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer, under four sentences: The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and remanded the case for further proceedings. The Board found that the Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) reports were not substantial evidence because neither physician personally examined the applicant, violating administrative rules. Therefore, the record needs further development, specifically a medical-legal evaluation by an infectious disease expert to determine if Reiter's Syndrome is a consequence of the admitted industrial injury (malaria). This is necessary before reconsidering findings on permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRonald HodgesChevron Overseas Petroleum IncBroadspire Services IncFindings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationReiter's Syndromeindustrial injurymalariapermanently totally disabled
References
9
Case No. ADJ8689638
Regular
Dec 01, 2016

AVI AZOULAY vs. CITY OF ORANGE, YORK SERVICES

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding its prior decision that applicant Avi Azoulay sustained an industrial injury. The Board found that Azoulay's bacterial infection, which spread to his bloodstream from his colon, qualified as a "blood-borne infectious disease" under Labor Code section 3212.8. This presumption of industrial causation applied despite the infection originating internally, as the statute's language and purpose encompass such conditions. Consequently, the defendant failed to overcome the presumption and provide evidence that the condition existed prior to employment.

Labor Code section 3212.8presumption of industrial causationblood-borne infectious diseasejuvenile correction officerPetition for Reconsiderationbacterial infectionpathogenic microorganismsanti-attribution clausedivericulitisscar
References
2
Case No. ADJ6990407
Regular
Nov 02, 2011

DANIEL CHESNUT vs. MANTECA POLICE DEPARTMENT, MUNICIPAL POOLING WALNUT CREEK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The applicant, a police officer, sought to establish that his testicular cancer was presumptively industrial under Labor Code section 3212.1. However, the Agreed Medical Evaluator concluded that the cancer's manifestation fell outside the established ten-year minimum latency period for solid tumors, thus rebutting the statutory presumption. The Board found this conclusion to be substantial evidence, particularly as the applicant's cancer was not characterized by extreme aggressiveness or massive exposure doses that might shorten latency.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDaniel ChesnutManteca Police DepartmentMunicipal Pooling Walnut CreekADJ6990407Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 3212.1testicular cancerinjurious exposurepolice officer
References
7
Case No. ADJ460520 (SAL 0101308)
Regular
Feb 22, 2010

Joaquin Borges vs. COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse a finding that applicant Joaquin Borges sustained a cumulative trauma injury from asbestos exposure while employed by the County of Santa Cruz in 1989, resulting in colorectal cancer. The Board found insufficient substantial medical evidence to establish causation, noting Dr. Duncan's opinion relied on an inaccurate exposure history and lacked a clear dose-response analysis for non-asbestos worker exposure. The matter is returned to the trial level to determine if applicant is entitled to a presumption of injury under Labor Code section 3212.1.

Cumulative traumaAsbestos exposureColorectal cancerIndustrial injuryMedical probabilityExposure assessmentLatency periodDose-response relationshipPeace officer presumptionLabor Code section 3212.1
References
0
Case No. ADJ557069 (LBO 0383687)
Regular
Mar 20, 2012

LEON SMITH vs. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES/PSI as administered by BROADSPIRE SERVICES

This case concerns an applicant who claimed an industrial injury from pushing hydraulic doors, resulting in a neck injury and quadriparesis. The WCJ found no industrial injury, relying on the opinion of a qualified medical evaluator (QME). The QME concluded that the applicant's severe cervical condition was caused by a pre-existing infectious abscess and would have manifested independently of the claimed industrial incident. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding substantial medical evidence from the QME that negated industrial causation and no need to further develop the record. The Board also admonished applicant's counsel for failing to properly verify and cite evidence in the petition for reconsideration.

Industrial injuryReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJIndustrial causationMedical evidenceQualified Medical EvaluatorCervical abscessSpinal collapseSubstantial evidence
References
8
Case No. ADJ9826556
Regular
Aug 05, 2016

Spencer Bachus vs. John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, Hi-Desert Medical Center

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior decision finding applicant sustained a work-related viral meningitis injury. Defendants argued insufficient medical evidence linked the injury to employment and that the identified virus was not definitively work-acquired. The WCAB determined the existing medical evidence, particularly the Qualified Medical Evaluator's opinions, did not sufficiently establish a special risk of exposure due to the applicant's specific job duties. The case was returned for further development of the record, including a more detailed analysis of the applicant's job tasks and potential exposure risks, and potentially a new medical evaluation by an infectious disease specialist.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardViral meningitisIndustrial injuryDual employmentPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator (PQME)Substantial medical evidenceCausationSpecial riskFurther proceedingsRescinded
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 17 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