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. ADJ7423046
Regular
Aug 20, 2012

MITCHELL CONTE vs. LYONS MAGNUS, INC., TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT, AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for removal, which the Appeals Board denied. The lien claimant sought to compel discovery of documents from the defendant employer, but their request was deemed "grossly overbroad." The Board noted the lien claimant could have obtained medical reports directly and is not entitled to other documents as they are not a party. The Board also admonished both parties for boilerplate filings that wasted the Board's time.

Petition for RemovalPetition to QuashFirst Request for Production of DocumentsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantOverbroad DiscoveryWCJWalk-through DocumentDeclaration of ReadinessMedical Reports
References
Case No. ADJ4646699 (VNO 0453022) ADJ1524259 (VNO 0448334)
Regular
May 04, 2012

PATRICIA BARDLEY vs. R.R. DONNELLEY FINANCIAL, GALLAGHER BASSETT

This case involves an applicant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB denied the petition, upholding the original finding of industrial injury to various body parts, temporary disability, and 17% permanent disability. The applicant argued for 100% permanent disability and challenged the apportionment to non-industrial rheumatoid arthritis. The WCAB adopted the judge's report, concluding the applicant's arguments were unsubstantiated by the record and that supplemental filings containing unintroduced evidence were improper.

BardleyR.R. Donnelley FinancialGallagher BassettADJ4646699ADJ1524259Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJindustrial injurypsych
References
Case No. MON 219914
Regular
Mar 26, 2008

KATHLEEN WEBB vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This case involved a $\$50$ sanction imposed on applicant's attorney for repeatedly failing to punch holes in documents submitted to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, a violation of Rule 10392. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the attorney's claim of inadvertence unconvincing given repeated warnings and the resulting delays. The Board emphasized that non-compliance with filing rules can indeed lead to sanctions under Labor Code § 5813.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsRule 10392Labor Code § 5813Administrative Law JudgeHole-punched documentsInadvertenceDelayJudicial authority
References
Case No. ADJ-4279077 (SDO 0317244)
Regular
Jun 09, 2016

TINA BARONI vs. CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE NATIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued a Decision After Removal ordering the striking of three sets of documents from the EAMS record. These documents pertained to San Diego Superior Court Case Number 37-2016-00006537-CU-IC-CTL and were submitted without objection. The WCAB previously issued a Notice of Intention to Strike these documents, stating they would be removed unless good cause to the contrary was shown. No objections were received from the parties or the identified attorneys.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalStriking DocumentsEAMS recordCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationReliance National Indemnity CompanyLiquidationSan Diego Superior CourtObjectionGood Cause
References
Case No. ADJ4279077 (SDO 0317244)
Regular
May 05, 2018

TINA BARONI vs. CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE NATIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has removed this case for the stated intention to strike documents filed by attorney Adrienne D. Cohen, who is not of record. These documents, which include notices related to a San Diego Superior Court case and a petition for writ of prohibition, are deemed irrelevant and improperly filed. The WCAB asserts that California Superior Courts lack jurisdiction over the WCAB and that CIGA failed to utilize proper procedural remedies. The WCAB will strike the documents unless good cause is shown to the contrary within ten days.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalStriking DocumentsEAMS RecordCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationReliance National Indemnity CompanyCity of OceansideAdrienne D. CohenNotice of Related CaseWrit of Prohibition
References
Case No. SRO 0115364
Regular
Jul 09, 2007

PAULETTE BELL vs. SANTA ROSA CITY SCHOOLS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the previous award, and found that the applicant did not sustain an industrial injury. While the applicant experienced exposure to asbestos, silica, and lead, there was insufficient medical evidence to establish a present injury or need for treatment. The Board clarified that the applicant may pursue a claim in the future if a disability arises from the exposure.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial ExposureAsbestosQuartz SilicaLeadDate of InjurySelf-Procured Medical ExpensesCumulative TraumaSpecific Injury
References
Case No. ADJ7252567
Regular
Apr 28, 2011

CURT HARRIS vs. CAR QUEST, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant, Curt Harris, filed a document requesting a change of venue for his workers' compensation case. This document was not verified and was not served on all parties. The Appeals Board construed this as a petition for removal, which is subject to specific procedural rules. Because the petition was untimely filed and failed to meet verification and service requirements, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed it.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalChange of VenueVerified DocumentTimelinessWCAB Rule 10843PWCJOrder DenyingUnverifiedImproper Service
References
Case No. ADJ7247116 ADJ7241415 ADJ7407598 ADJ9052220 ADJ9432209
Regular
Feb 12, 2015

DOROTHY TRISTAN vs. CITY OF FRESNO, AMERICAN ALL-RISK LOSS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for removal regarding a discovery order. The employer argued that releasing documents related to a prior DFEH/EEOC discrimination claim and allowing a continued deposition would cause irreparable harm due to privilege concerns. The Board found the employer failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, emphasizing that privilege objections can still be raised for specific documents. The Board also noted the prolonged discovery dispute and encouraged expeditious resolution of the underlying workers' compensation claims.

Petition for RemovalMotion to QuashDepositionDocument ProductionPrivileged RecordsDFEHEEOCLabor Code Section 132aDiscovery DisputeMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ4687711 (ANA 0381886) ADJ276364 (AHM 0142454)
Regular
Jan 21, 2010

## JOSE BERROSPE (DECEASED) vs. NIGHT SWEEPS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the State Compensation Insurance Fund's (SCIF) Petition for Removal. SCIF sought to avoid producing certain documents related to the deceased worker's dependents to the Death Without Dependents (DWD) Unit, despite stating they would produce documents mentioning DWD to the judge for in-camera review. The petition was dismissed because it was unverified, violating WCAB Rule 10843(b). Furthermore, the WCAB found no merit to the petition, as SCIF indicated compliance with the judge's order and thus was not aggrieved. The WCAB also noted SCIF's petition lacked reasonable justification and could be subject to sanctions.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for RemovalUnverified PetitionWCJ OrderDocumentary EvidenceDeath Without Dependents UnitIn Camera ReviewPrivileged DocumentsWork ProductSanctions
References
Case No. ADJ803377 (RIV 0075685) ADJ6675892
Regular
Oct 05, 2017

SANDRA ARMENTA vs. SAN BERNARDINO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to address a plainly erroneous finding of fact in an Independent Medical Review (IMR) determination. The IMR incorrectly stated there was no documentation of constipation, despite medical reports confirming this issue, which was a basis for denying Amitiza. The WCAB also noted a case numbering error in the original findings of fact. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the findings and returned the matter to the trial level for correction and further proceedings regarding the IMR determination's validity.

WCABReconsiderationIndependent Medical Review Determination (IMR)Findings of Fact (FOF)San Bernardino Sheriff's DepartmentApplicantPlainly Erroneous FactDocumentationPain ReliefFunctional Benefit
References
Showing 1-10 of 827 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