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

Linger v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.

Claimant sustained permanent partial disabilities from two 1977 accidents and one 1980 accident, leading to separate awards from different employers and their respective insurance carriers. Initially, the claimant received concurrent benefits exceeding the statutory maximum rate. Upon discovering these concurrent payments, a joint hearing was held. An Administrative Law Judge apportioned the award, which was subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board, stating that concurrent awards exceeding the statutory maximum for a permanent partial disability were impermissible. The claimant appealed this decision, arguing for a per-accident application of the statutory maximum. However, the appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, asserting that the Workers' Compensation Law establishes an overall maximum rate for permanent partial disability regardless of the number of accidents or employments.

Permanent Partial DisabilityConcurrent AwardsStatutory MaximumApportionmentMultiple AccidentsWage LossJudicial PrecedentAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation BoardInsurance Carriers
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 2015

Matter of Curcio v. Sherwood 370 Management LLC

The claimant, a building engineer, sustained a work-related back and neck injury, initially classified as a permanent total disability by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) with awarded counsel fees. The Workers' Compensation Board (Board) modified this, finding a permanent partial disability with a 90% loss of wage-earning capacity and reduced counsel fees due to an improperly completed application. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial medical evidence supporting a partial disability and a 90% loss of wage-earning capacity based on the claimant's age, education, work history, and functional abilities. The court also upheld the reduction of counsel fees due to the attorney's failure to accurately complete the required fee application form.

Permanent Partial DisabilityWage-Earning Capacity LossWorkers' Compensation BenefitsCounsel FeesMedical EvidenceVocational FactorsOC-400.1 ApplicationAdministrative AppealAppellate DivisionMedical Impairment Guidelines
References
12
Case No. ADJ17547374
Regular
Oct 16, 2025

WARREN P. HARVEY vs. SOCAL MACHINE, INC., TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE, FARMERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered applicant Warren P. Harvey's petition for reconsideration regarding the equitable hourly reimbursement rates for in-home health care provided by his spouse, asserting errors in the WCJ's rate calculation and attorneys' fees. After an unsuccessful settlement conference, the parties filed Stipulations With Request for Award, agreeing to permanent total disability and further medical treatment for the applicant, though these stipulations did not resolve the reconsideration issues. The Board approved these stipulations, finding them adequate and in the applicant's best interest, and issued an award based upon them, which included specific disability indemnity, medical treatment, and attorney's fees. The Board also commended the parties for resolving some important issues and urged them to continue efforts on the remaining disputes.

Equitable hourly reimbursement ratesIn-home health careCaregiver dutiesNursing dutiesCommunity HHC providerPetition for reconsiderationStipulations With Request for AwardPermanent total disabilityTemporary disability indemnityAttorneys' fee
References
0
Case No. ADJ1099369
Regular
Jul 01, 2009

SANDRA SMULLEN vs. CITY OF SAN DIEGO, PERMISSIBLY SELF-INSURED

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award, finding that the applicant's pre-2005 treating physician reports sufficiently indicated permanent disability. Consequently, the Board applied the 1997 permanent disability rating schedule instead of the 2005 schedule. This resulted in an amended award of 56 percent permanent disability based on the stipulated rating under the 1997 schedule. The decision reversed the prior award that had utilized the 2005 schedule and awarded 35 percent permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent Disability Rating Schedule2005 Rating Schedule1997 Rating ScheduleLabor Code section 4660(d)Petition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryPolice OfficerBack InjuryTreating Physician
References
6
Case No. ADJ7211843
Regular
Jan 10, 2019

STEVEN SALAZAR vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involves a senior laundry worker, Steven Salazar, who claimed permanent total disability due to cumulative trauma injuries. The County of Los Angeles sought reconsideration of a 100% permanent disability award, arguing for apportionment to non-industrial factors as supported by Agreed Medical Examiners. The Appeals Board found that the initial award improperly bypassed medical apportionment and returned the case to the trial level for further development of the record. However, they amended the award to reflect the defendant's stipulation of at least 95% permanent disability, ordering immediate payment of benefits based on this stipulation.

Cumulative Trauma InjuryPermanent Total DisabilityMedical ApportionmentAgreed Medical Examiners (AME)Vocational ExpertWhole Person Impairment (WPI)AMA GuidesSomatic Symptom DisorderGAF ScoreLabor Code Section 4660
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lloyd v. New Era Cap Co.

The claimant, a sewing machine operator, suffered a permanent low back injury in a 2003 workplace fall, leading to an award of workers' compensation benefits. The self-insured employer sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund, arguing for apportionment of the disability with a preexisting 1975 gunshot wound. However, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board denied this request, finding the claimant to have a permanent total disability solely due to the 2003 accident, thus precluding reimbursement under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d). The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing the Board's authority to reclassify disabilities and its non-binding nature of party stipulations that are not properly approved. The court found substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that the 2003 accident alone caused the permanent total disability.

Workers' CompensationSpecial Disability FundReimbursementPermanent Total DisabilityPreexisting ImpairmentApportionmentMedical EvidenceBoard AuthorityStipulationAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. ADJ6848871
Regular
Jun 06, 2018

STEVEN KING vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ADMINISTRATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

In Steven King v. State of California, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's award finding 61% permanent disability, including new psychiatric disability. The prior stipulated award in 2010 found 23% permanent disability for wrist and shoulder injuries. The defendant argued the WCJ erred by relying on unsubstantial medical evidence and including pre-award disability as "new and further." Adopting the WCJ's report, the Board affirmed the 61% permanent disability finding, concluding the increased disability was properly assessed.

Petition for ReconsiderationNew and Further DisabilityPsychiatric DisabilityPermanent DisabilityStipulated AwardPetition to ReopenPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial Medical EvidenceIndustrial InjuryLegally Uninsured
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of VanDermark v. Frontier Insurance

In this workers' compensation appeal, the employer and its carrier challenged two decisions by the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning a claimant's permanent total disability. The claimant sustained a back injury in 1998 and was initially found to have a permanent partial disability. However, the Board later modified the award, concluding the claimant had a permanent total disability after August 2004, a finding supported by the testimony of her treating orthopedic surgeon despite conflicting medical evidence. The employer also contested the denial of their applications for reconsideration and/or full Board review, arguing insufficient evidence and an abuse of discretion. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decisions, deferring to its resolution of conflicting medical evidence and finding no arbitrary or capricious action in denying reconsideration, as no new evidence was presented.

Workers' Compensation LawPermanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityMedical EvidenceConflicting Medical OpinionsBoard's DiscretionReconsideration ApplicationFull Board ReviewAppellate ReviewSufficiency of Evidence
References
6
Case No. ADJ6978832
Regular

Mona Dill vs. CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, PSI, by CJPIA through their TPA, YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, reversing the WCJ's order for a QME evaluation. The Board found the applicant's stipulated zero percent permanent disability and need for further medical treatment to be adequate, given the treating physician's report of no ratable impairment and the applicant's expressed desire to settle. Therefore, the Stipulations with Request for Award were approved, granting the applicant ongoing medical care and zero percent permanent disability.

Petition for RemovalStipulations with Request for AwardPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)ApportionmentPermanent DisabilityMedical TreatmentIndustrial InjuryRecreation SupervisorPro PerInformation and Assistance Officer (I & A)
References
0
Case No. ADJ3923265 (MON 0243587)
Regular
Jun 24, 2011

, Deirdre vs. RALPHS GROCERY STORE; Permissibly Self-Insured and Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves an applicant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The applicant's petition focused on a discrepancy in the stipulated dates for permanent disability payments, which the original award failed to fully reflect. The defendant's petition argued for a lack of evidence regarding psychiatric disability apportionment and claimed the applicant was attempting a double recovery for prior injuries. The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition and granted the applicant's, amending the award to accurately reflect the parties' stipulations on the commencement of permanent disability benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardPermanent DisabilityCumulative InjuryApportionmentPsychiatric DisabilityLife PensionStipulationsOverpayment
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 12,035 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