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. ADJ13836041 (MF), ADJ13829431
Regular
Oct 20, 2025

Eriq Fitzpatrick vs. Fast Retailing USA, Inc.; The Hartford

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant Eriq Fitzpatrick's petition for reconsideration against Fast Retailing USA, Inc. and The Hartford. The Board found the petition to be successive, as the issue of venue had been previously decided against the applicant, who failed to file a timely writ of review. Additionally, the decision confirmed that the Board's action on the petition was timely under Labor Code section 5909 and that all parties received proper notice of transmission.

Successive PetitionPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code 5909TransmissionEAMSRule 10600(b)Report and RecommendationNotice of TransmissionNewly AggrievedWrit of Review
References
Case No. ADJ17388371
Regular
Sep 25, 2025

Doug McCullough vs. Modesto Fire Department, Salida Fire Protection Department District

The defendant, Modesto Fire Department, sought reconsideration of a June 12, 2025, Findings of Fact and Order which imposed two penalties on them for unreasonably delayed benefits to the applicant under Labor Code Section 5814.3. The Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, adopting the Workers' Compensation Judge's report. The Board concluded that the defendant had sufficient information to apply the presumption of industrial causation under Labor Code Section 3212.1 and unreasonably denied both inter vivos and death claims, thereby warranting the penalties. The decision also noted a failure to provide accurate notice of case transmission to the Appeals Board as required by Labor Code section 5909(b)(1).

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5909TransmissionSixty-Day PeriodNotice of TransmissionElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Report and RecommendationFindings of Fact and OrderLabor Code Section 5814.3
References
Case No. ADJ4500251
Regular
Apr 07, 2025

EALISE CRUMB vs. APC TECHNOLOGY, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Ealise Crumb's petition for reconsideration against APC Technology, Inc. and State Compensation Insurance Fund. The Board found the petition to be untimely as it was filed on January 27, 2025, past the December 20, 2024 deadline for reconsideration of the PWCJ's November 20, 2024 order. Additionally, the Board confirmed its timely action on the petition within 60 days of transmission, as required by the amended Labor Code section 5909. The untimeliness of the filing rendered the Board without jurisdiction to consider the merits of the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5909untimely petition60-day periodtransmission dateEAMSnotice of transmissionservice of reportjurisdictional time limit
References
Case No. ADJ9496892
Regular
Sep 15, 2025

JUNE JONES vs. CALIFORNIA SPECIAL PATROL, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

Applicant's attorney sought reconsideration of an Order Rescinding Submission, Order Vacating Finding and Order, and Order to Develop the Record dated June 27, 2025, arguing further record development was unnecessary. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) recommended dismissal of the reconsideration petition and denial if treated as a petition for removal. The Appeals Board timely acted on the petition but noted issues with notice of transmission to the parties. They dismissed the petition for reconsideration, deeming the underlying order non-final, and denied the petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Rescinding SubmissionFindings and OrderLabor Code section 5909Transmission of CaseElectronic Adjudication Management SystemNotice of TransmissionFinal Order
References
Case No. ADJ10107934
Regular
May 14, 2025

Librada Sanchez vs. Goodwill Industries, Redwood Fire and Casualty Insurance Company

Defendant sought reconsideration of an earlier order by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) that rescinded a Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) dismissal of a lien. The WCAB dismissed the petition for reconsideration on two grounds. First, it was improperly filed with the Oakland District Office instead of the Appeals Board, although it was transmitted. Second, and more importantly, the Appeals Board determined that the February 21, 2025 order, which rescinded the lien dismissal, was not a 'final' order because it did not determine any substantive right or liability or a threshold issue fundamental to the claim for benefits. Therefore, the petition sought review of a non-final order.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationNon-final orderLabor Code section 5909TransmissionEAMSNotice of transmissionSubstantive right or liabilityThreshold issueInterlocutory procedural order
References
Case No. ADJ17872943
Regular
May 12, 2025

MICHAEL WILLIAMS vs. UNIFIED GROCERS, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Spectrum Medical Group. The Board adopted the WCJ's report which found that the applicant did not sustain an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. This decision was based on the credible testimony of the defendant's witness, Edward Chavez, and the determination that Dr. Amin Nia's medical opinion was unsubstantial due to its reliance on an inaccurate history of the applicant's job duties. Consequently, Spectrum Medical Group was not entitled to payment for medical treatment provided.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationCredibility DeterminationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Labor Code § 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMSTransmissionNotice of TransmissionIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ18606422
Regular
Mar 05, 2025

ELCAR GALINDO vs. JOBSOURCE COMMERCE INC., PRECISION WIRE PRODUCTS, INC., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY CO OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Spectrum Medical Group-Lien Claimant. The petition challenged the approval of a Compromise and Release (C&R) agreement between the applicant, an uninsured employer, and an insurer, particularly concerning a clause that absolved the insurer from lien responsibility. The Board found the petition premature and recommended it be treated as a petition to set aside the settlement, advising a trial-level hearing to develop the record. The decision to dismiss was made within the 60-day statutory period, calculated from the case's transmission to the Appeals Board on January 14, 2025.

Adjudication NumberPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMSTransmissionReport of the workers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJ ReportProof of ServiceCompromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ11166250
Regular
Aug 18, 2025

Diane Clay vs. County of Los Angeles, Tristar

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Diane Clay against County of Los Angeles and Tristar. The Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report. The primary issue was the timeliness of the petition. According to Labor Code section 5909, the Appeals Board must act on a petition within 60 days of transmission, and a petition must be filed within 25 days of a final decision. The Board found that the petition, filed on June 11, 2025, was more than 25 days after the Findings of Fact and Order issued on May 14, 2025, making it untimely. As untimeliness is a jurisdictional issue, the Board lacked authority to consider it on merits. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissalLabor Code section 5909Appeals Board60-day periodtransmissionEAMSservice of report25-day limit
References
Case No. ADJ11204383
Regular
Sep 29, 2025

NASRI BAKRI vs. COSTCO WHOLESALE, HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied NASRI BAKRI's petition for reconsideration regarding a lien claim by Premier Psychological Services. The Board upheld the Workers' Compensation Judge's finding that the applicant's claimed psychological and neurological injuries were non-industrial. Furthermore, Dr. Michaels' medical-legal report, which formed the basis of the lien claim, was deemed not to constitute substantial medical evidence due to insufficient foundation and a lack of comprehensive history. Consequently, Premier's lien claim for both medical-legal and treatment costs was denied in full.

ADJ11204383Costco WholesaleHelmsman Management ServicesLLCPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Transmission of CaseNotice of TransmissionBurden of Proof
References
Case No. ADJ15563281
Regular
Mar 17, 2025

LENIN QUIROZ vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the City of Los Angeles, challenging an arbitrator's findings that applicant Lenin Quiroz sustained an industrially caused testicular cancer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the defendant's contentions regarding the statute of limitations, the substantiality of medical evidence from Agreed Medical Evaluator Dr. Fred Kuyt, and the proper occupational group number. The Board denied the petition, affirming the arbitrator's findings that the statute of limitations did not bar the claim, Dr. Kuyt's medical opinion constituted substantial evidence, and Occupational Group Number 490 was appropriate based on the applicant's job duties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5909Sixty-Day RuleTransmission of CaseEAMSNotice of TransmissionSubstantial Medical EvidenceAOE/COEAgreed Medical Evaluator
References
Showing 1-10 of 77 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