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. 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. SFO 0499272
Regular
Jul 07, 2008

Helen Miller vs. Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that Helen Miller was an employee of Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center and sustained an industrial injury to her left ankle. The Board found Miller was not a volunteer due to the extensive benefits received and the employer's control, and her jogging injury during a lunch break was a reasonable expectancy of employment, not barred by Labor Code section 3600(a)(9). Therefore, her injury arose out of and occurred in the course of her employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardHelen MillerGreen Gulch Farm and Zen CenterEverest National InsuranceGallagher BassettSFO 0499272Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 3351Labor Code Section 3352(i)Employee definition
References
Case No. ADJ9942537
Regular
Dec 09, 2018

ANGELO RIOS vs. RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING, INSURANCE CO OF THE WEST SAN DIEGO

This case involves an applicant seeking workers' compensation benefits for an injury sustained during his unpaid lunch break. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the prior decision that denied the claim. The Board found that the applicant's injury did not fall under the "going and coming" rule due to evidence that he was performing work-related tasks during his break, including taking work calls and researching for a bid. Furthermore, the Board determined the injury likely occurred after the unpaid lunch period concluded, extending into a paid break.

Going and coming ruledual purpose exceptioncourse of employmentscope of employmentAOE/COEpersonal comfort doctrinepaid breaksunpaid lunch breakassaultthird-party assault
References
Case No. ADJ11076937
Regular
Apr 07, 2018

MELISSA MAZZIE vs. TORRANCE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the finding that the applicant was not entitled to temporary disability (TD) benefits at the stipulated rate of $1,172.57 per week. The Board found that the applicant, a salaried teacher, continued to receive her regular wages during winter and spring breaks. Therefore, her TD rate should not have been reduced, as the purpose of TD is to substitute for lost wages.

Temporary DisabilityWage LossAverage Weekly EarningsLabor Code Section 4453(c)(3)Winter BreakSpring BreakSalary DistributionSeasonal WorkerPaid Work DaysPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ1688022 (VNO 0558018)
Regular
May 03, 2010

RONALD TORRES vs. FOREVER 21, FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CHUBB GROUP OF INSURANCE COMPANIES

This case involves a worker injured playing soccer off-duty on company property. The employer argued the injury was not compensable under Labor Code section 3600(a)(9) as it was voluntary recreational activity. The Board reversed the initial finding, holding that the worker's voluntary participation in the soccer game, which was not required by or a reasonable expectancy of employment, fell outside the scope of workers' compensation coverage. Therefore, the applicant's claim for benefits for his shoulder injury was denied.

Labor Code section 3600(a)(9)Ezzy v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.off-duty recreational activityvoluntary participationreasonable expectancy of employmentexpressly or impliedly requiredsoccer game injuryindustrial injuryleft shouldercompensable injury
References
Case No. ADJ7186626 ADJ7186634
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

JAMES WILLIAMS vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board clarified that an employee's signed waiver of participation in a recreational activity does not preclude a finding of compensability if the activity was sanctioned by the employer or expected as part of employment. In this case, the basketball game was neither sanctioned nor expected by the employer. Therefore, the applicant's injury sustained during the game is not compensable under Labor Code section 3600(a)(9).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 3600(a)(9)sanctioned activitywaiveremployment expectationcompensabilityCity of Stockton v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Tensfeldt v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Taylor v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. SAU8813471
Regular
Feb 07, 2023

KIMBERLY KENNEY vs. SEGUOYAH, INC., FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for removal of an order consolidating liens and imposing a temporary stay. The consolidation aims to resolve a common legal issue regarding whether the lien claimant is controlled by a criminally charged physician, which would trigger an automatic stay under Labor Code section 4615. The Board found no due process violation, as the order only stays other lien issues pending the common issue's adjudication. Furthermore, the consolidation serves judicial efficiency by avoiding duplicate rulings on this critical threshold matter.

WCABPetition for RemovalOrder of Consolidation and StayLien ClaimantLabor Code section 4615Due ProcessIssue PreclusionConsolidation OrderWCJFarmers Insurance Exchange
References
Case No. ADJ10864843
Regular
Nov 15, 2018

YOLANDA PLASCENCIA vs. HYUNDAI CAPITAL AMERICA, SOMPO AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant who sustained injuries after falling into a pothole on her employer's premises during a break. The applicant was in the process of switching vehicles with her daughter when the incident occurred. The defendant argued the injury was not AOE/COE, as the personal vehicle exchange served no employer benefit and the personal comfort doctrine did not apply. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report which found the injury compensable under the personal comfort doctrine. The Board reasoned that it's reasonably contemplated for employees to access the employer's parking lot during breaks, and moving a personal car is a personal convenience incidental to employment.

AOE/COEPersonal Comfort DoctrineIndustrial InjuryCourse of EmploymentWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJEmployer's PremisesPaid Break
References
Case No. ADJ7332384
Regular
Jul 19, 2011

DEBORAH CULP vs. UNITED HEALTH GROUP, U.S. FIDELITY & GUARANTY INSURANCE, Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the applicant's claim. The applicant argued her injury during an extended break en route to a PTA meeting was compensable. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found the injury did not arise out of and occur in the course of employment. This conclusion was based on stipulated facts indicating the accident occurred during more than a lunch break, for a personal errand unrelated to employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedStipulated FactsAOE/COEGoing and Coming RulePersonal Comfort DoctrineCompensable InjuryNon-compensable InjuryPaid Lunch Break
References
Case No. ADJ9876999, ADJ9876980
Regular
Jul 20, 2016

ROLANDO RENTERIA vs. CITY OF DOWNEY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of Downey's petition for reconsideration. The Board upheld the finding that police officer Rolando Renteria sustained a compensable injury to his right thumb while weightlifting at home. This was because the WCJ found the off-duty exercise to be a reasonable expectancy of employment, citing Renteria's role as a breacher on the entry team and participation in strength-based training and fitness tests. The Board deferred to the WCJ's credibility findings regarding Renteria's belief that his employer expected such fitness maintenance.

Rolando RenteriaCity of DowneyADJ9876999ADJ9876980Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderAOE/COEright thumb injuryoff-duty weightliftingLabor Code section 3600(a)(9)
References
Showing 1-10 of 143 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