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. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Case No. ADJ3007917 (SAC 0360257) ADJ2678306 (SAC 0360255) ADJ1603912 (SAC 0364515) ADJ2464840 (SAC 0360256) ADJ4004410 (SAC 0360258) ADJ7144350
Regular
Apr 29, 2011

CARLLIE WILLIAMS vs. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, finding that the Department of Transportation violated a prior stipulated settlement with the applicant. The settlement required the DOT to remove specific documents from the applicant's personnel file, and these documents were deemed irrelevant to the workers' compensation proceedings. The Board amended the prior order to explicitly prohibit the DOT from using these removed documents for any purpose in the applicant's workers' compensation claims. While the DOT cannot use these specific documents, they are still permitted to present witness testimony regarding the underlying events.

Petition for removalState Personnel Boardstipulated settlementpersonnel filepsychiatric injuryactual events of employmentgood faith personnel actionLabor Code section 3208.3vitiateevidence
References
Case No. ADJ6974901
Regular
Nov 18, 2011

JOHN SWENNING, JR. vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO; Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim where the defendant sought discovery of documents related to potential misconduct and impeachment evidence. The applicant had a separate settlement agreement with the Fresno County District Attorney's Office, which included a confidentiality clause and required the expurgation of his personnel file. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's discovery motion, subject to the condition that any personnel file produced must be the expurgated version provided under the settlement agreement. This ruling allows for the requested discovery while respecting the terms of the prior settlement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSettlement AgreementMutual ReleaseConfidentiality ClauseIndustrial InjuryLumbar SpineKneesDistrict Attorney's InvestigatorPetition for Discovery
References
Case No. ADJ481937 (RIV 0081478)
Regular
Mar 08, 2018

JERRY OLVERA vs. CEMENT UNLIMITED, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

In Olvera v. Cement Unlimited, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. The petition was electronically filed one day after the jurisdictional deadline of January 23, 2018, as the Order Dismissing Lien was served by mail on December 29, 2017. The Board reiterated that the filing deadline is jurisdictional and requires actual receipt of the petition, not just proof of mailing. Therefore, the Appeals Board lacked the authority to consider the merits of the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeService by MailProof of FilingElectronic FilingOrder Dismissing LienMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ8438087
Regular
Feb 24, 2017

CONSUELO ACEVEDO vs. SYSTEM SOLDING USA, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending a prior decision to find that Tri-City Health Group's lien was timely filed. The Board affirmed the finding that Komberg Chiropractic's lien was barred by the statute of limitations due to late filing on December 29, 2015, when services ended December 28, 2012. However, Tri-City Health Group's lien, filed electronically on March 21, 2016, was deemed timely, as the deadline of March 19, 2016, fell on a weekend and the next business day was utilized. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings regarding Tri-City Health Group's lien.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsStatute of LimitationsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderLabor Code Section 4903.5EAMSElectronic FilingBusiness DayTimely Filed
References
Case No. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ7020366
Regular
Aug 22, 2013

OCTAVIO GONZALEZ vs. BODEGA LATHE CORPORATION, PACIFIC COMP INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Octavio Gonzalez's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. The petition was submitted more than 25 days after the administrative law judge's decision, exceeding the 20-day statutory limit, which can be extended by five days for mail. Because the deadline for filing a petition for reconsideration is jurisdictional, the Board lacked the authority to consider it. Had the petition been timely, it would have been denied on the merits as well.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely filingJurisdictional time limitLabor Code section 5903Administrative Law JudgeWCJ's Report and RecommendationMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. HaglerScott v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ7371382
Regular
Jun 02, 2014

EARL SMITH vs. TIME WARNER CABLE; CHARTIS, administered by ACE USA

This case involves a worker claiming psychiatric injury. The defendant seeks to dismiss the claim based on the "good faith personnel action" defense under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration because the administrative law judge (WCALJ) failed to address the elements of this defense. The WCAB rescinded the previous findings and returned the case for further proceedings, requiring the WCALJ to specifically address whether the personnel actions were lawful, nondiscriminatory, and in good faith, and if they substantially caused the injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric injuryLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Good faith personnel actionPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJPanel Qualified Medical ExaminerPredominant causeSubstantial cause
References
Case No. MON 0279679
Regular
Jun 26, 2008

EILEEN HALPERN vs. THE HERTZ CORPORATION, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Hertz Corporation's request to reconsider its dismissal of Hertz's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that Hertz's petition was untimely because it was filed with the San Francisco district office, rather than directly with the Appeals Board itself, as required by Rule 10840 for decisions issued by the Board. Even if the petition had been lodged with the district office on the filing deadline, it was not received by the Appeals Board itself within the statutory timeframe.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for reconsiderationUntimely filingWCAB Rule 10840District office filingAppeals Board filingMandatory and jurisdictionalReconsideration on Board motionLabor CodeCode of Civil Procedure
References
Case No. ADJ9230683
Regular
Jul 07, 2014

JOSE GARCIA, Jorge Garcia, JORGE LUIS GARCIA vs. RAMTEX INC.; EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, RAMTEX INCORPORATED, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by applicant Jose Garcia challenging an administrative law judge's discovery rulings. The applicant sought specific documents, including witness statements and employee handbooks, which the defendant claimed did not exist. The judge ordered the production of the personnel file but denied the request for other documents, finding the defendant's representations credible and applicant's discovery requests lacking due diligence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, adopting the judge's reasoning that the petition was untimely and that no prejudice or irreparable harm resulted from the discovery rulings.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRamtex Inc.Employers Compensation Insurance CompanyADJ9230683Administrative Law JudgeReport of Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeVerified AnswerGood Faith InvestigationDeposition of Applicant
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,299 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