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. SFO 0492500
Regular
Jul 16, 2007

JACK BERMAN (Dec.), CAROL KINGSLEY (Wid.) vs. BRONSON, BRONSON & McKINNON, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES GROUP/CIGA for FREMONT (SAN DIEGO)

This case concerns CIGA's petition for reconsideration of a decision awarding the applicant a self-imposed 10% penalty on death benefits and an additional penalty for unreasonable refusal to pay. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, holding that death benefits paid in installments are subject to Labor Code section 4650(d) because they are paid in the same manner and amounts as temporary disability indemnity. The Board remanded the case to the trial level for further proceedings, including consideration of the applicant's separate petition for penalties.

CIGAFremont Corporation in liquidationCambridge Integrated ServicesRescinding OrderFindings and AwardLabor Code section 4650(d)self-imposed penaltydeath benefitsLabor Code section 4661.5unreasonable refusal to pay
References
3
Case No. ADJ9932467
Regular
Oct 16, 2017

THERESA MCFARLAND vs. REDLANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied an applicant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision that "Return-To-Work" supplemental payments under Labor Code section 139.48 are not "compensation" as defined by Labor Code section 3207. Therefore, the applicant was not entitled to a second penalty under Labor Code section 5814 for the employer's delay in providing a Supplemental Job Displacement Benefit voucher, as that delay did not cause a delay in a compensable benefit. The Board found that the applicant's penalty claim for the voucher delay was already resolved and that imposing a second penalty for a non-compensable benefit delay would be unfair and against the principle of balancing justice.

Labor Code section 139.48Return-To-Work supplemental paymentscompensation definitionLabor Code section 3207Labor Code section 5814 penaltyLabor Code section 4658.7 voucherSupplemental Job Displacement Benefitcompromise and release agreementGage v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.unreasonable delay
References
1
Case No. ADJ4320293 (PAS0014831)
Regular
Nov 03, 2011

LAWRENCE WEITZER vs. LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE WEITZER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended a prior order, primarily to delete a penalty award. The Board affirmed that the defendant incorrectly paid an attorney's fee installment to a trust instead of the applicant's attorney. Consequently, the defendant must pay the outstanding attorney fee, plus interest, and interest on funds repaid by the trust. The penalty was removed because the applicant was deceased, as such penalties are payable to the applicant.

SCIFattorney's fee paymentWeitzer Trustinterest on awardLabor Code section 5814 penaltyunreasonable delaygood faith legal basisCompromise and Releaseapplicant deceasedpenalty paid to applicant
References
1
Case No. ADJ2464522 (OAK 0338150)
Regular
Feb 19, 2013

CHARLES COWART vs. JACK IN THE BOX, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the prior award of penalties for unreasonable delay in funding an annuity. The Board found that applicant's own delay in providing necessary information was the primary cause of the annuity funding delay, thus not warranting a penalty. However, the Board affirmed a $10,000 penalty for the employer's unreasonable delay in paying applicant's attorney's fees, to be paid to the applicant, not the attorney. Attorney's fees for enforcing the compromise and release were deferred for trial level resolution.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCompromise and ReleaseLabor Code section 5814PenaltyUnreasonable DelayAnnuity FundingAttorney's FeesReconsiderationFindings and AwardDecision After Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 13, 2001

A.I. Transport v. New York State Insurance Fund

The Supreme Court, New York County, denied a liability insurer’s application to stay an arbitration initiated by a workers’ compensation insurer. The workers’ compensation insurer sought to recover benefits paid to a bus passenger injured in an accident, where the bus was insured by the liability insurer. The court interpreted Insurance Law § 5105 (a) to allow a workers’ compensation provider, paying benefits in lieu of first party benefits, to recover amounts paid from the insurer of a liable party, even if one of the vehicles involved is a bus. It was determined that an exception for losses arising from the use of a motor vehicle (Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]) did not apply, as the respondent was a workers’ compensation insurer and not an automobile insurer. Consequently, the arbitration was allowed to proceed, and the petition to stay it was dismissed and unanimously affirmed.

Arbitration DisputeInsurance Law InterpretationNo-Fault BenefitsWorkers' Compensation SubrogationBus AccidentLiability CoverageStatutory ConstructionAppellate ReviewInsurer Recovery
References
4
Case No. ADJ2558327, ADJ8142450 & ADJ8142428
Regular
Nov 09, 2016

ALENA GIARDINA vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) decision to award a 25% penalty on a portion of benefits. The penalty was applied to the difference between what the applicant was entitled to under Labor Code §4850 and what was actually paid due to the employer's offset for sick pay. The WCJ found this single penalty appropriate for the employer's continuous conduct of delaying payment. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning, concluding that the penalty was properly calculated and served the goal of substantial justice.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5814(a)Unreasonable DelayPenaltyDiscretionFair BalanceSubstantial JusticeLicensed Peace OfficerLabor Code Section 4850
References
1
Case No. ADJ2529270 (MON0205624)
Regular
Dec 17, 2010

ZOI FOVOS vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT permissibly self insured c/o SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision that found an award was paid timely without penalties. Applicant contended the defendant failed to include interest with the award payment, entitling them to penalties and attorney fees. The Board found the WCJ's decision failed to address the timeliness of interest payment and the applicability of penalties under Labor Code sections 5814 and 5814.5. The case is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings and a new decision regarding potential penalties and attorney fees for the delayed interest payment.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAwardPenaltyAttorney's FeeInterest on AwardLabor Code Section 4650Labor Code Section 5814Labor Code Section 5814.5
References
6
Case No. ADJ3904838 (LBO 0377238)
Regular
Jun 20, 2015

EDWARD MORSE vs. CONWAY WESTERN EXPRESS, INDEMNITY INSURANCE, CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICE COMPANY

This case involves cross-petitions for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision regarding an injured truck driver. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition to correct a clerical error, increasing the third-party credit from $179,001.50 to $199,001.50. The Board denied the applicant's petition regarding penalties for failure to provide medical treatment, deferring the issue until the application of the credit is determined. The original decision found the applicant sustained industrial injuries to multiple body parts and systems and awarded penalties against the defendant were not warranted.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryTruck DriverNeck InjuryBack InjuryShoulder InjuryKnee InjuryUpper Extremity Injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ4348083 (VNO 0451349)
Regular
Nov 01, 2019

JUAN MALDONADO vs. HYDRO-MILL COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the WCJ's order denying attorney fees on a late payment penalty. The WCJ failed to develop an adequate record for decision, necessitating a return to the trial level. Applicant's attorney claims entitlement to fees on the penalty paid to the applicant, arguing the statute doesn't prohibit it. However, the Board noted that entitlement under other provisions must still be shown, and procedural rule 10778 regarding notice to the applicant was also not met.

Attorney FeesLabor Code Section 4650(d)Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLate Payment PenaltyIndemnityAdverse InterestIndependent CounselWCAB Rule 10778
References
3
Case No. ADJ3890427 SAC 0364747 ADJ6797951
Regular
Jun 07, 2012

JOHN ERICK RITCHIE vs. CMC/FONTANA STEEL, ACE USA

The applicant sought reconsideration of an award for industrial injuries, primarily arguing the $15\%$ penalty for delayed payments was too low. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the original decision, and returned the matter for further proceedings. The WCAB clarified that statutory interest for delayed payments is $10\%$ and any accrued interest on attorney fees must be paid to the attorney. The WCAB also noted ambiguity regarding penalties for delayed attorney fees, stating such penalties are payable to the applicant.

WCABindustrial injurylow backpsycheiron workerpermanent disability indemnityattorney feesLabor Code section 5814penalty increasestatutory interest
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 14,104 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