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. ADJ252083 (NOR 0166266) ADJ3827633 (LAO 0784953) ADJ3395707 (LAO 0784956) ADJ629194 (LAO 0849490) ADJ2985386 (LAO 0784955) ADJ2625573 (LAO 0784951)
Regular
Apr 12, 2011

CLAUDIA DYER vs. BOEING/McDONNELL DOUGLAS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, CHARTIS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied CIGA's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's findings of industrial injuries to the applicant's knees, neck, back, shoulders, hips, hands, and ankle across multiple dates. The Board found the WCJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence, specifically Dr. Nelson's well-reasoned medical opinions on causation and apportionment. CIGA's petition was also found deficient for failing to comply with procedural requirements for referencing the record. Finally, CIGA was estopped from asserting the statute of limitations defense due to the employer's knowledge of the injury and failure to provide notice of rights.

CIGAFremont InsuranceliquidationPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and Awardindustrial injuryaircraft mechanickneesneckback
References
Case No. ADJ7352906
Regular
Jul 10, 2012

ANA PEREZ vs. PALOMINO JANITORIAL SERVICES, ENDURANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, FIRST COMP INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a "take nothing" finding, upholding the WCJ's decision that applicant Ana Perez failed to prove an industrial injury. The WCJ found applicant's testimony not credible due to inconsistent reporting of the injury date, mechanism, and prior medical history. The medical evidence, including a PQME report, concluded no reasonable evidence of an industrial injury existed, citing inconsistent history and denial of trauma in contemporaneous medical records. Therefore, applicant did not meet her burden of proof to establish an industrial injury.

ReconsiderationWCABWCJcredibility determinationamended claimmechanism of injuryinconsistent historyGarden Grove Hospitaldenies traumafibromyalgia
References
Case No. STK 0204930
Regular
Jul 23, 2007

DARREN BUTLER vs. GRANT JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration. The employer argued the applicant's injury was due to serious and willful misconduct for jumping off a roof. The Board affirmed its prior decision, finding the applicant's actions constituted extreme poor judgment, not the quasi-criminal intent required for serious and willful misconduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardserious and willful misconductpetition for reconsiderationinjury causationemployer liabilitysupervisor instructionsgross negligenceMercer-Fraser Co.quasi-criminal qualitywanton disregard
References
Case No. ADJ1128865 (VNO 0244369), ADJ1909887 (VNO 0181430)
Regular
Jan 09, 2012

JOE NAVARRO vs. LOCKHEED MARTIN

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision regarding Joe Navarro's claims against Lockheed Martin. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's report, which found Navarro to be an unreliable historian with significant symptom magnification. Consequently, the Board denied injury claims for heart and high blood pressure, and upheld a 27% permanent disability award for a psyche injury, based on the judge's credibility findings.

ADJ1128865ADJ1909887plastic parts fabricatorplastic parts fabricator supervisorcontinuous traumapsyche injurypermanent disabilitynon-industrial apportionmentcredible historiansymptom magnification
References
Case No. ADJ2608124
Regular
Dec 19, 2011

GUO YING XIE vs. EDWARD INTERNATIONAL INC., EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a stipulation settling their lien for interpreting services at $\$ 85.00$. The lien claimant argued their representative lacked authority and new evidence existed, but provided no proof. The Board found no good cause to set aside the stipulation, noting that a poor outcome is insufficient reason and the dispute over representative authority is an internal matter. The Board affirmed the WCJ's order approving the stipulation, deeming the petition frivolous.

Stipulation and OrderLien ClaimantReconsiderationGood CauseHearing Representative AuthorityNew EvidenceLabor Code Section 5702Appeals Board Rule 10496Weatherall CaseStipulation Set Aside
References
Case No. ADJ3946969
Regular
Nov 28, 2011

GARY GLASGOW vs. RAM CON CO., INC., CIGA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision awarding the applicant 47% permanent disability. The applicant's petition for removal was dismissed as reconsideration was the proper remedy for challenging the final award. The decision affirmed findings that the applicant was not a credible historian and that his claimed neurocognitive deficits were not work-related. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found substantial evidence supported the disability rating based on conflicting medical opinions and video evidence contradicting the applicant's claimed limitations.

WCABReconsiderationRemovalRamcon Co.Inc.CIGALegion InsuranceLiquidationSedgwick CMSPlumbing Foreman
References
Case No. ADJ888335 (MON 0330155)
Regular
Jan 14, 2013

ROY MAYES vs. CITY OF PASADENA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of Pasadena's petition for reconsideration of a finding that they violated Labor Code section 132a by discriminating against Roy Mayes. The Board found that Mayes' termination shortly after returning from a work-related injury, despite a prior evaluation indicating he met job requirements, constituted evidence of being singled out. Despite the employer's claim of poor performance, the Board deferred to the judge's credibility findings, which found the employer's evidence inconsistent. Therefore, the employer's petition for reconsideration was denied.

Labor Code section 132adiscriminationprobationpoor performanceFindings of FactPetition for ReconsiderationReport and Recommendationprima facie caseaffirmative defenseindustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ10351995
Regular
Jun 25, 2018

ARACELY HERRERA-MARTINEZ vs. 24 HOUR PERSONNEL SERVICES, INC., and ZURICH NORTH AMERICA INSURANCE, administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding that she did not sustain a cumulative injury. This decision was based on the Qualified Medical Examiner's (QME) report, which was deemed substantial evidence. The QME found the applicant to be a poor historian with exaggerated symptoms and lacking objective findings to support her claims. The Board found the applicant's treating physician's report insufficient due to an inaccurate understanding of job duties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderQualified Medical ExaminerSubstantial EvidenceCumulative InjuryPrimary Treating PhysicianInjury AOE/COEMedical HistoryPhysical Examination
References
Case No. ADJ1511860
Regular
Jun 24, 2011

TIBERIO CALDERON MORENO vs. ACV APPRAISAL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petitions for reconsideration. The applicant failed to adequately state grounds for error, instead marking all general grounds for reconsideration. The WCJ found the applicant to be an unreliable historian whose claimed injuries at ACV Appraisal were not supported by medical evidence and were contradicted by prior medical records of pre-existing conditions. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which highlighted the applicant's poor credibility and lack of medical evidence linking his current conditions to the alleged employment injury.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersWCJindustrial injuryherniaback injurypsychesexual dysfunctionsleep disorder
References
Case No. ADJ6716371
Regular
Apr 16, 2012

ANDREW WEITNAUER vs. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

This case involves an applicant seeking to commute his permanent disability award and life pension into a lump sum to purchase a motor home. The administrative law judge denied the commutation, citing the applicant's history of poor financial judgment and the risk of him being unable to meet future expenses. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, agreeing with the judge's findings. The Board also admonished the applicant's counsel for filing a poorly drafted petition and a confusing letter that failed to comply with procedural rules.

Commutation of awardLife pensionIndustrial injuryCardiovascular systemPermanent disabilityFinancial judgmentForeclosureBest interestsUsurious interestEconomic downturn
References
Showing 1-10 of 27 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