Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ11350389

Regular

Sep 23, 2025

JOSE PEREZ LEDESMA, Marjorie Martinez Interpreting vs. RUIZ & SON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinding a prior order that ruled a notice to produce was an invalid discovery mechanism. The WCAB found that California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 10642 expressly permits the use of notices to produce in workers' compensation proceedings, similar to Civil Code of Civil Procedure section 1987(b). Therefore, the defendant was ordered to produce the relevant interpreter payment and Explanation of Review documents requested by the cost petitioner. This decision emphasizes the system's intent for a simple and nontechnical path to relief, allowing authorized discovery methods.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationNotice to ProduceSubpoenaWCJRemovalLabor CodeCode of Civil ProcedureRule 10642Explanation of Review

References

Case No. ADJ6909720

Regular

Nov 20, 2014

CLICIA MORALES MONARREZ, Alicia Morales Monarrez, Alicia Morales Monarrez vs. PARAMOUNT FARMS INTERNATIONAL, Paramount Farms

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Paramount Farms' Petition for Reconsideration. Paramount Farms contested the applicant's permanent partial disability rating and the indemnity awarded, arguing that the judge improperly disregarded a PQME's opinion and relied on another doctor's flawed assessment. The Board found that the petition was partially untimely, and on the merits, it adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the applicant's treating physician's opinion was substantial evidence, and the indemnity calculation was correct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDenying PetitionPermissibly Self-InsuredParamount Farms InternationalAlicia Morales MonarrezOrder Amending AwardPermanent Partial DisabilityIndemnityDr. Khosrow Tabaddor

References

Case No. ADJ4388600

Regular

Sep 09, 2011

CARLOS CALVILLO vs. ALLIED BUILDING MAINTENANCE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The lien claimant, Joyce Altman Interpreters, sought reconsideration of an award for interpreter services, arguing they were owed the full amount claimed plus penalties and interest. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, upholding the administrative law judge's decision. The judge found that while some interpreter services were compensable, the claimant's documentation was deficient and charges were unreasonable, precluding full recovery of penalties and interest. The Board agreed that statutory provisions do not expressly allow penalties and interest for interpreter services in this context.

Lien claimantJoyce Altman InterpretersPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Findings and AwardCompromise and Releasepenalties and interestLabor Code section 4600reasonably required interpreter servicesReport and Recommendationcustodian of records

References

Case No. ADJ9638509; ADJ9638510

Regular

Nov 17, 2020

CESAR MARROQUIN vs. OAKWOOD CEMETERY, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The Appeals Board rescinded the original Findings and Order, finding that Advanced Pain Control's declaration under Labor Code section 4903.8(d) was valid, but Quality Interpreting's declaration was invalid due to the declarant's lack of personal knowledge and insufficient supporting evidence. Consequently, Quality Interpreting's lien was dismissed for failing to comply with statutory requirements and for being untimely filed. The case was returned for further proceedings regarding Advanced Pain Control's lien.

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)Joint Findings and Orderprima facie evidencecompetent to testifylien claimantdeposition transcripthearsay evidencepersonal knowledgeevidentiary ruleslien conference

References

Case No. ADJ370366 (VNO 0526012)

Regular

Jun 24, 2009

JUAN ZAMANO vs. DIVERSE STAFFING, F. A. RICHARDS AND ASSOCIATES

This case involved a dispute over an applicant's entitlement to temporary disability benefits and recommended neck surgery following an admitted industrial injury. The employer sought reconsideration, arguing the medical evidence supporting the WCJ's award was insufficient and that a different statutory scheme for medical treatment disputes should apply. The Appeals Board found the employer's arguments regarding statutory interpretation unpersuasive and, critically, that the employer's utilization of the correct dispute resolution process for spinal surgery, specifically whether Utilization Review (UR) was properly conducted under Labor Code section 4610, was unclear. Consequently, the Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and remanded the case to the trial level to determine if the employer engaged in UR, instructing the WCJ to issue a new decision based on that determination and relevant case law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryTemporary DisabilityNeck SurgerySpinal SurgeryQualified Medical EvaluatorLabor Code Section 4062Labor Code Section 4610Utilization Review

References

Case No. ADJ779198 (SJO 0267719)

Regular

Nov 19, 2010

EVELIN GARCIA vs. SERVICE PERFORMANCE CORPORATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB granted reconsideration and reversed a prior award for interpreting services, finding the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof. The claimant did not demonstrate the interpreting services were reasonable, necessary, or provided by qualified interpreters. Crucially, the medical provider's office advertised Spanish-speaking staff, and the doctor himself spoke Spanish, negating the necessity for external interpretation services. Therefore, the lien for interpreter fees was disallowed.

WCABReconsiderationLien ClaimantInterpreting ServicesQualified InterpreterReasonablenessNecessityBurden of ProofLabor Code Section 4600Labor Code Section 5811

References

Case No. ADJ8361822

Regular

Aug 03, 2015

LORENA CHAVEZ vs. ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES, ESIS

This case concerns ABC Interpreting, Inc.'s petition for reconsideration of a WCJ's decision awarding them $180.00 for interpreter services. ABC Interpreting sought $250.00, claiming entitlement to the pre-established market rate, plus interest and penalties for late payment. The Board denied the petition, affirming the WCJ's award because ABC Interpreting failed to provide adequate documentation of market rate, their qualifications as an interpreter, and because Labor Code section 5811 does not authorize penalties and interest. The Board found the $180.00 award consistent with the reasonable and customary rate for interpreter services in the applicable geographic area.

Petition for ReconsiderationInterpreter FeesLabor Code Section 5811Market RateSuperior Court Fee ScheduleQualified InterpreterDeposition ServicesUntimely PaymentInterest and PenaltyAmended Order

References

Case No. ADJ1781281 (MON 0350482) ADJ4191242 (MON 0350483)

Regular

Aug 11, 2011

ANGEL ACOSTA vs. GUILDCRAFT FURNITURE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, AMERICAN CASUALTY

This case involves a lien claimant seeking payment for interpreting services provided to an injured worker. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to disallow the lien claimant's claim for $25,573.00. The Board found that the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof to establish that the interpreting services were reasonably necessary, that the interpreters were qualified, and that the fees were reasonable. Crucially, no evidence was presented demonstrating a need for an interpreter for effective doctor-patient communication or that the interpreters were certified as required by law.

Lien claimantInterpreting servicesQualified interpreterBurden of proofReasonableness of feesIndustrial injuryMedical treatmentLabor Code section 4600(f)Compensable servicesWorkers' compensation administrative law judge

References

Case No. ADJ4476816 (LAO 0833665) ADJ3061442 (LAO 0876935)

Regular

Apr 20, 2010

Jose Gutierrez vs. Southern Building Maintenance, Granite State Insurance Company, administered by CHARTIS, Expert Development Services, State Fund Insurance Fund

This case involves Jose Gutierrez's petition for reconsideration of a Compromise and Release settlement, alleging fraud due to the absence of a Spanish interpreter. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was untimely filed, submitted well after the statutory deadline. Additionally, the petition lacked the required verification under Labor Code section 5902. Even if timely and verified, the WCAB indicated it would have denied the petition on its merits based on the Workers' Compensation Judge's report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Compromise and ReleaseFraudTimelinessUnverified PetitionLabor Code § 5903Labor Code § 5902WCJ ReportDismissal

References

Case No. ADJ6933348, ADJ6933382

Regular

Apr 30, 2013

SILVESTRE BAUTISTA vs. HI-SHEAR CORPORATION, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a worker's compensation award. The Board granted reconsideration, affirming the finding of industrial injury but modifying the temporary disability award. Specifically, the Board limited temporary disability benefits to 104 compensable weeks, as mandated by Labor Code section 4656(c), overruling the administrative law judge's interpretation. The award was recalculated to reflect this statutory limit, with attorney fees and a lien for unemployment benefits also addressed.

WCABReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardIndustrial InjuryCumulative InjuryTemporary DisabilityLabor Code Section 4656Compensable WeeksDate of InjuryDate of Commencement of Temporary Disability Payment

References

Showing 1-10 of 1,216 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ11350389

Regular

Sep 23, 2025

JOSE PEREZ LEDESMA, Marjorie Martinez Interpreting vs. RUIZ & SON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationNotice to ProduceSubpoenaWCJRemovalLabor CodeCode of Civil ProcedureRule 10642Explanation of Review

References

Case No. ADJ6909720

Regular

Nov 20, 2014

CLICIA MORALES MONARREZ, Alicia Morales Monarrez, Alicia Morales Monarrez vs. PARAMOUNT FARMS INTERNATIONAL, Paramount Farms

References

Case No. ADJ4388600

Regular

Sep 09, 2011

CARLOS CALVILLO vs. ALLIED BUILDING MAINTENANCE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

References

Case No. ADJ9638509; ADJ9638510

Regular

Nov 17, 2020

CESAR MARROQUIN vs. OAKWOOD CEMETERY, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)Joint Findings and Orderprima facie evidencecompetent to testifylien claimantdeposition transcripthearsay evidencepersonal knowledgeevidentiary ruleslien conference

References

Case No. ADJ370366 (VNO 0526012)

Regular

Jun 24, 2009

JUAN ZAMANO vs. DIVERSE STAFFING, F. A. RICHARDS AND ASSOCIATES

References

Case No. ADJ779198 (SJO 0267719)

Regular

Nov 19, 2010

EVELIN GARCIA vs. SERVICE PERFORMANCE CORPORATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

WCABReconsiderationLien ClaimantInterpreting ServicesQualified InterpreterReasonablenessNecessityBurden of ProofLabor Code Section 4600Labor Code Section 5811

References

Case No. ADJ8361822

Regular

Aug 03, 2015

LORENA CHAVEZ vs. ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES, ESIS

Petition for ReconsiderationInterpreter FeesLabor Code Section 5811Market RateSuperior Court Fee ScheduleQualified InterpreterDeposition ServicesUntimely PaymentInterest and PenaltyAmended Order

References

Case No. ADJ1781281 (MON 0350482) ADJ4191242 (MON 0350483)

Regular

Aug 11, 2011

ANGEL ACOSTA vs. GUILDCRAFT FURNITURE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, AMERICAN CASUALTY

References

Case No. ADJ4476816 (LAO 0833665) ADJ3061442 (LAO 0876935)

Regular

Apr 20, 2010

Jose Gutierrez vs. Southern Building Maintenance, Granite State Insurance Company, administered by CHARTIS, Expert Development Services, State Fund Insurance Fund

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Compromise and ReleaseFraudTimelinessUnverified PetitionLabor Code § 5903Labor Code § 5902WCJ ReportDismissal

References

Case No. ADJ6933348, ADJ6933382

Regular

Apr 30, 2013

SILVESTRE BAUTISTA vs. HI-SHEAR CORPORATION, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

References

Showing 1-10 of 1,216 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.