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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 11, 2004

Claim of Frank v. New York City Transit Authority

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found a causal relationship between a decedent's death and his employment. The employer engaged in prolonged retaliatory and harassing conduct, including unjustifiably withholding differential pay, threatening to revoke medical benefits, refusing to reimburse pharmacy expenses, denying vacation leave, and filing a false claim of absence without leave. This behavior, alongside repeated failures to substantiate claims regarding benefit overpayments, led to prolonged hearings. Following one such hearing, the decedent suffered a fatal myocardial infarction. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board subsequently found a causal connection between the employer's conduct and the decedent's death. The Appellate Court affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that the death resulted from the employer's "prolonged pattern of intimidation, deceit, and unlawful coercion, the wrongful withholding of benefits to which decedent was entitled, and generally disgraceful conduct towards the decedent." The employer's claims regarding witness preclusion were dismissed as not properly before the court.

Workers' CompensationCausationEmployer RetaliationStress-Related DeathMyocardial InfarctionBenefits WithholdingAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceProcedural IssuesUnjustified Conduct
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Cramer v. BASF Wyandotte Corp.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found an occupationally related disease contributed to the decedent's death. The decedent had bronchitis, an occupational disease, and also aortic stenosis, which caused his death. The key issue was whether the bronchitis contributed to his death by preventing cardiac surgery that would have prolonged his life. Expert medical testimony indicated that the bronchitis made him ineligible for the necessary aortic valve replacement surgery. The appellate court found substantial evidence to support the Board's determination that the bronchitis prevented life-prolonging surgery and affirmed the Board's amended decision.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseBronchitisAortic StenosisMedical TestimonyCausationSurgical ContraindicationLife ExpectancyAppellate ReviewBoard Determination
References
5
Case No. ADJ7354587
Regular
Oct 02, 2012

STEVEN LUEVANO vs. JUNIOR'S CAR STEREO, FIRST COMP OMAHA FOR ENDURANCE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the dismissal of Steven Luevano's case for failure to prosecute. Applicant's attorneys failed to provide sufficient evidence of good cause to justify the prolonged inactivity of the claim. Consequently, the Board imposed $1,500 in sanctions jointly and severally against applicant's attorneys for frivolous actions and unnecessary delay.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsFailure to ProsecuteReconsiderationMedical Provider Network (MPN)Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator (PQME)Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Bad Faith ActionsFrivolous TacticsUnnecessary Delay
References
4
Case No. MON 0284613
Regular
Jan 14, 2008

LEOPOLDO L. VILLASENOR vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case concerns whether applicant Leopoldo L. Villasenor's Serious and Willful misconduct claim against LAUSD was barred by the statute of limitations. The Appeals Board found that the 12-month limitation period was tolled due to the prolonged dispute over applicant's employer, which prevented a final determination until April 19, 2004. Consequently, the Board rescinded the prior decision and remanded the case for a decision on the merits of the Serious and Willful claim.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and Willful MisconductStatute of LimitationsTollingElkins v. DerbyIndustrial InjuryEmployer LiabilityEmployment DisputeSuperior CourtPetition for Reconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ312006 (LAO 0748305) ADJ824176 (PAS 0042661)
Regular
Aug 06, 2008

ANNA CLIFTON vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the WCJ's decision, finding that the applicant's claim for vocational rehabilitation services was barred by the statute of limitations. The applicant's initial request for dispute resolution was filed more than five years after the Stipulations and Award, exceeding the one-year limit under former Labor Code section 5405.5, which governs such claims. The Board concluded that affirming the WCJ's decision would unfairly reward the applicant's prolonged inaction.

Vocational RehabilitationStatute of LimitationsQualified Injured WorkerNotice of Potential EligibilityRehabilitation UnitStipulations and AwardDate of InjuryFindings and OrderReconsiderationExpedited Hearing
References
3
Case No. ADJ10818354
Regular
Oct 08, 2018

LOURDES MOSQUEDA vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

In Mosqueda v. County of Riverside, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that the applicant sustained an industrial injury to her coccyx. This finding was based on the substantial medical evidence provided by a Qualified Medical Evaluator whose opinion linked the applicant's prolonged sitting at work to her pain. The Board found the employer's medical evidence insufficient due to a lack of reasoning and explanation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAOE/COEcoccyx injuryprolonged sittingcumulative traumaPQMEsubstantial evidenceburden of proofindustrial causationmedical opinion
References
13
Case No. ADJ1346416 (ANA 0390656)
Regular
Jan 19, 2010

ADAM TRAN vs. LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICE, BROADSPIRE CLAIMS SERVICES, INSURANCE CO. OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for removal, which sought to rescind an order compelling a medical examination. The applicant argued he could withdraw from an Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME) agreement due to prior difficulties obtaining a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The Board found the petition timely filed but denied it, as the applicant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm from the AME evaluation, despite a prolonged, unsuccessful attempt to secure a QME.

Petition for RemovalAgreed Medical EvaluatorQualified Medical EvaluatorQME PanelLabor Code section 4062.2TimelinessWCJSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWCAB Rule 10843(a)
References
0
Case No. ADJ7724159
Regular
Sep 17, 2012

MICHAEL KING vs. WARNER BROTHERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's attorney's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's decision. The WCAB found that while the defendant's attorney engaged in some improper conduct and service errors, the attorney's subsequent apology and correction, coupled with the timely filing of a good-faith objection, negated the need for sanctions and penalties. The Board also admonished applicant's attorney for escalating a minor fee dispute into prolonged motion practice, wasting judicial resources.

WCABAmended Findings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5710Petition for SanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Labor Code Section 5814Labor Code Section 5814.5Attorney's FeesMonetary Sanctions
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jenks v. Airco Speer Carbon Graphite

The Workers’ Compensation Board awarded compensation benefits to the claimant based on a finding of occupational disease. The board determined that the claimant’s prolonged exposure to harmful dusts was a significant factor in causing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bronchitis. This determination was supported by credible medical evidence and testimony. The appeals from these board decisions, filed April 8, 1977, and November 15, 1977, were affirmed by the court. Costs were awarded to the Workers’ Compensation Board against the employer and its insurance carrier.

occupational diseasechronic obstructive pulmonary diseasebronchitisharmful dustsworkers' compensation benefitsappealaffirmed decisionsubstantial evidencemedical evidencetestimony
References
0
Case No. ADJ2998112 (SJO 0268663)
Regular
May 02, 2011

ALFREDO MACIEL vs. COLOR SPOT NURSERIES, INC., CHARTIS INSURANCE, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's order admitting a medical report was an interlocutory procedural order, not a final determination of substantive rights. The Board also denied the petition as a request for removal, finding no prejudice or irreparable harm, and noting the defendant's inaction and failure to attend a properly noticed deposition. Furthermore, the defendant's prolonged delay in objecting to the report and its failure to properly identify parties under Board Rule 10550 were also critical factors in the denial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalRule 32Labor Code section 4062.3Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)ex parte communicationinterlocutory procedural orderssubstantive right or liabilityprejudice or irreparable injury
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 107 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