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. ADJ18001417
Regular
Sep 05, 2025

CHRISTOPHER CANDIA vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration in the case of Christopher Candia v. City and County of San Francisco. The Board adopted the Arbitrator's Report and Recommendation, which found applicant Christopher Candia's meningioma to be a compensable industrial injury. The decision was based on the cancer presumption under Labor Code section 3212.1 for firefighters, as the medical opinion of treating neurosurgeon Dr. Bruce McCormack classified the tumor as Grade II, indicating malignant features, and evidence showed Candia's exposure to carcinogens during his employment. The Board upheld the arbitrator's determination, giving greater weight to Dr. McCormack's opinion over the IME Dr. Raye Bellinger's.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationArbitrator's ReportLabor Code Section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management Systemsubstantial evidenceneurosurgeontreating physicianIMEmeningioma
References
Case No. ADJ1885105 (LAO 0822725)
Regular
May 15, 2012

SCOTT SIMONS vs. SUPERHEAT SERVICES, INC/INSPERITY, KEMPER INSURANCE, SEDGWICK CMS/ SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding no unreasonable delay in the provision of medical treatment. Applicant failed to establish a delay in the provision of home care or transportation services as no bills had been submitted to the defendant. The issue of the reasonable value of home health care services was deferred pending a bill submission and potential negotiation between the parties. The Board emphasized the need for better communication between the parties to avoid further litigation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationUnreasonable DelayMedical TreatmentHome Health CareTransportationPenaltyLabor Code Section 5814Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ7574646
Regular
Jan 25, 2012

HEATHER YARBOROUGH vs. JENNY CRAIG, AIG INSURANCE c/o SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for removal and reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed 34 days after the order was served. The petition argued the administrative law judge erred by ordering treatment outside the Medical Provider Network, but the board found the petition was filed beyond the jurisdictional time limits. Furthermore, the board noted that the order compelling the defendant to arrange for a PQME evaluation and other examinations was not a final order, which is required for reconsideration. Therefore, both petitions were dismissed.

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingMPNMedical Provider NetworkNeurosurgeonOrthopedistNeurologistTreating Doctor
References
Case No. ADJ3235679 (SFO 0509485)
Regular
Aug 02, 2011

JENNIFER MILLER vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This case involves an applicant claiming her employer violated Labor Code section 132a by discriminating against her due to work restrictions following an industrial injury. The applicant alleged she was taken off work and threatened with termination despite her ability to perform her job. The Appeals Board overturned the trial judge's finding of discrimination. They reasoned that the employer's actions were a reasonable response to escalating medical restrictions and applicant's symptoms, not discriminatory treatment. The Board found the applicant's evidence of disparate treatment compared to a coworker with a non-industrial condition was too vague and insufficient to prove discrimination.

Labor Code Section 132aDiscriminationReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryDriving RestrictionsCervical FusionBehavioral ClinicianPsychiatric Social WorkerTemporary Disability
References
Case No. EUR 0038039; EUR 0038040 EUR 0038041; EUR 0039476
Regular
May 12, 2008

JERRY LANEY vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

The applicant sought reconsideration of an order terminating temporary disability benefits, arguing they should extend until a later medical evaluation date. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's reasoning. The Board also noted procedural confusion regarding the termination petition being filed in unrelated cases where benefits were not being continued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition to Terminate Temporary DisabilityFindings and OrderReconsideration DeniedIndustrial InjuryEquipment OperatorNeurosurgeonTemporary Disability BenefitsAdministrative Law JudgeReport and Recommendation
References
Case No. SFO 0488825
Regular
Dec 14, 2007

MARK HURLEY vs. STEELCASE, INC. (METRO FURNITURE), LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant injured in 2000 who claimed temporary total disability (TTD) beginning in 2005. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, overturning the WCJ's denial of TTD from December 5, 2005, through the present. The WCAB found that the agreed medical evaluator's opinion supported the applicant's claim that the industrial injury caused TTD from that date forward.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardSteelcase Inc.Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanyMark HurleySFO 0488825Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law Judge (WCJ)Industrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ3699477
Regular
Nov 07, 2011

GARY TOMEI vs. BAY ALARM COMPANY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded its prior order granting reconsideration. This was because the applicant's petition for reconsideration was improperly filed, as the prior WCAB decision was not a final order determining the rights or liabilities of the parties. Therefore, the WCAB dismissed the applicant's petition as not subject to reconsideration under Labor Code section 5900(a).

Petition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationCervical spinal surgeryMedical DirectorAdministrative DirectorSpinal surgery second opinionOrthopedic surgeonNeurosurgeonLabor Code section 4062(b)Conforming report
References
Case No. SAC 257957
Regular
Jan 25, 2008

SUSAN FOUST vs. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Self Insured, Adjusted by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns a dispute over authorization for spinal surgery. The defendant employer denied the applicant's treating physician's request for surgery based on utilization review and claimed the applicant's objection was untimely. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order compelling the parties to obtain a second opinion was interlocutory, not a final order. The WCAB also denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code section 4062Utilization ReviewSecond Opinion ReportOrthopedic SurgeonNeurosurgeonAnterior Cervical FusionStipulated Award
References
Case No. ADJ288083 (RDG 0128539)
Regular
Jun 01, 2010

JACOB VERVALIN vs. MISSION UNIFORM & LINEN, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

The Appeals Board rescinded the original decision, finding that the WCJ erred in admitting a supplemental AME report and authorizing spinal surgery based on it. The Board determined that the proper procedure under Labor Code sections 4610 and 4062 for disputing spinal surgery recommendations was not followed. Specifically, the medical opinions from Dr. Jones and Dr. Pappas were found to be based on inadequate reviews of the applicant's medical records, necessitating further development of the record. Consequently, the case was returned to the trial level for additional proceedings and a new decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjurySpinal SurgeryAgreed Medical Examination (AME)Utilization Review (UR)Labor Code Section 4610Labor Code Section 4062Second Opinion Report
References
Case No. ADJ7376647 (1-ARB-130005)
Regular
Apr 25, 2016

Christopher Santi vs. Contra Costa Electric, Zurich Insurance Co.

The applicant seeks reconsideration of an arbitrator's decision concerning a July 2009 industrial injury. The applicant argues the arbitrator erred by not considering his Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) diagnosis, which treating and defense physicians link to $100\%$ permanent total disability. The applicant also challenges the apportionment of psychiatric disability, contending the QME's report lacks substantial evidence. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the case for further proceedings to allow the arbitrator to review critical evidence, specifically the deposition of the applicant's treating physician, and to address the CRPS findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardChronic Regional Pain SyndromeApportionmentQualified Medical ExaminerDepositionsMedical EvidencePermanent DisabilityTrial Level
References
Showing 1-10 of 13 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