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. ADJ9577721
Regular

RENE ESQUIVEL vs. MID STATE STEEL ERECTORS, INC., administered by BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration in case ADJ9577721. The Board adopted and incorporated the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCAB gave significant weight to the WCJ's credibility determination, as the judge observed witness demeanor. No substantial evidence warranted rejecting the WCJ's credibility findings.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ credibility determinationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.administrative law judge reportdenial of reconsiderationsubstantiality of evidencewitness demeanorlegal precedentcase ADJ9577721
References
Case No. ADJ9693295, ADJ9797058
Regular
Nov 09, 2017

TONY THANG PHUNG vs. METIS TPS LLC, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal, ruling that reconsideration was the proper remedy. The Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's findings and credibility determinations. The WCJ found the applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE). Great weight was given to the WCJ's credibility determinations due to the opportunity to observe witness demeanor.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationAOE/COEWCJ credibility determinationfinal orderthreshold issueadequate remedyRymer v. HaglerSafeway Stores
References
Case No. ADJ9770975
Regular
Feb 11, 2019

GUSTAVO RUBALCAVA vs. AMERJIT GILL AND COAST XPRESS AKA COAST XPRESS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for reconsideration in the case of Rubalcava v. Gill and Coast Xpress. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) and found no substantial evidence to overturn the WCJ's credibility determinations. The WCAB gave significant weight to the WCJ's opportunity to observe witness demeanor. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ credibility determinationsGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.substantiality of evidencedemeanor of witnessesdenial of reconsiderationadministrative law judgeapplicantdefendants
References
Case No. ADJ9675888
Regular
Mar 03, 2016

XIAO WEN LU vs. HAWAIIAN GARDENS CASINO, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Xiao Wen Lu's Petition for Reconsideration in this case against Hawaiian Gardens Casino and its insurer. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) report and reasoning. They gave significant weight to the WCJ's credibility determination, as the judge observed the witness's demeanor, and found no substantial evidence to overturn it. Consequently, the Petition for Reconsideration was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.ADJ9675888Hawaiian Gardens CasinoInsurance Company of the Westadministrative law judgedenial of reconsiderationwitness demeanor
References
Case No. ADJ7281695
Regular
Feb 02, 2017

MARIA COSME HERNANDEZ vs. CARDENAS MARKET, INC., PENNSYLVANIA MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION INSURANCE GROUP, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the applicant was not a credible witness, giving great weight to the WCJ's observation of her demeanor. The Board also found no substantial evidence to overturn the credibility determination and noted the applicant's failure to meet her burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. Furthermore, any objection to the admissibility of defendant's Exhibit A was deemed waived due to the lack of objection at trial.

Petition for ReconsiderationCredibility DeterminationDemeanor on the StandSubstantiality of EvidenceBurden of ProofPreponderance of EvidenceIndustrial InjuryAdmissibility of EvidenceWaived ObjectionWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ12108642
Regular
Apr 06, 2020

ARTHUR DURON vs. PERMASTEELISA NORTH AMERICA, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the original October 14, 2019 Findings, Award, and Order in the case of Arthur Duron. The Board granted reconsideration to further study the issues, but ultimately adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning. Great weight was given to the WCJ's credibility determinations, as they observed the witnesses' demeanor, and no substantial evidence contradicted these findings. The WCAB also noted that a single physician's opinion can constitute substantial evidence, even if it conflicts with other medical evidence.

ReconsiderationWCJCredibility determinationsSubstantial evidenceGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Place v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Findings Award OrderAffirmationMedical opinionsWitness demeanor
References
Case No. ADJ8855938
Regular
Apr 22, 2015

ARLENE SCHERY vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK, CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant suffered a compensable psychiatric injury. The Appeals Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) report, giving it great weight due to the opportunity to observe witness demeanor. The WCJ found that actual employment events, including sexual harassment, a YouTube video incident, classroom heat issues, and administrative failures, were predominant in causing the applicant's psychiatric injury, outweighing any good faith personnel actions. Medical evidence from a QME further supported that the applicant's symptoms stemmed from this stressful work environment.

PSYCHIATRIC INJURYINDUSTRIAL CAUSATIONGOOD FAITH PERSONNEL ACTIONSEXUAL HARASSMENTSTUDENT HARASSMENTTEACHER HARASSMENTYOUTUBE VIDEOEXCESSIVE HEATADMINISTRATION ISSUESRETALIATION
References
Case No. ADJ6950787
Regular
Jun 22, 2012

JOSE BARRIENTOS vs. MARK GREENBERG, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued the administrative law judge (WCJ) abused discretion by finding the applicant credible, specifically regarding the duration of employment to exclude him from employee status under Labor Code §3352(h). The WCJ adopted the report recommending denial, emphasizing applicant's credible testimony regarding hours worked and pay, and finding the defendant's testimony less reliable due to a lack of direct knowledge. The Board extended great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, affirming the denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility findingLabor Code §3352(h)employee definitionconflicting testimonyobservational demeanorunreliable testimonyunrebutted testimony
References
Case No. ADJ9972883
Regular
Dec 13, 2016

CARLOS HERNANDEZ vs. 360 NEW WAY, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for removal because the applicant failed to demonstrate that reconsideration would be inadequate. The Board also denied the petition for reconsideration, deferring to the arbitrator's credibility determinations based on witness observation. The Board found no substantial evidence to reject the arbitrator's conclusions regarding the issue of employment.

RemovalReconsiderationArbitrator's ReportFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueEmploymentCredibility DeterminationsDemeanor of WitnessesSubstantiality of Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ8865310
Regular
Feb 23, 2016

BERNARDO SALAZAR MOLINA vs. LANDRYS/McCORMICK & SCHMICK'S; INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. This denial was based on the WCJ's credibility determination, which was given great weight as the WCJ observed the witness. The Board found no substantial evidence to reject the WCJ's findings and adopted the WCJ's report as their own reasoning. Consequently, the petition for reconsideration was formally denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportcredibility determinationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.substantial evidenceWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boardadministrative law judgeincorporated reportdeny reconsiderationwitness demeanor
References
Showing 1-10 of 103 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