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. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. ADJ9625407
Regular
Sep 12, 2018

KEITH FIELD vs. CITY OF PINOLE

This case involves a firefighter who sustained bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome after retirement. The Appeals Board reversed the trial judge, holding that Labor Code section 4458.5 applies, entitling the applicant to permanent disability benefits calculated at the maximum indemnity rate. This applies regardless of the applicant's actual earnings or the fact that carpal tunnel syndrome is not a specifically enumerated presumptive injury. The case is remanded for determination of the precise date of injury to calculate the benefit rate.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKeith FieldCity of PinolePermissibly Self-InsuredMunicipal Pooling AuthorityADJ9625407Opinion and Decision After Reconsiderationindustrial injuryfirefighterbilateral upper extremities
References
Case No. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a denial of workers' compensation benefits, which was based on the finding that his claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board affirmed the denial, concluding that the applicant's job abandonment led to a termination prior to the filing of his claims. The Board also determined that the employer properly denied both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating a presumption of compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeApplicantDefendantRalphs Grocery CompanySecurity GuardIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ9350015
Regular
Feb 24, 2017

LAURA SIERRA vs. RUIZ CONTRACTING, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by MEADOWBROOKS INSURANCE GROUP, ICW

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Star Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that Star Insurance failed to meet its burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to establish entitlement to contribution. Furthermore, the petition did not adequately explain why new medical evidence was unavailable prior to the close of discovery. Therefore, the petition was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationArbitrator's ReportBurden of ProofAffirmative of the IssuePreponderance of the EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionReasonable Medical ProbabilityInadequate Medical HistoriesCumulative Trauma
References
Case No. ADJ7432904
Regular
Sep 24, 2012

NEDA MOTAVAKEL vs. FANTASTIC SAM'S, TOWER SELECT INSURANCE CO., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLP, STAR INSURANCE CO., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLP, ENDURANCE WORKERS' COMPENSATION, SOUTHERN INSURANCE CO., FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

This case involves an appeal by Star and Tower Insurance Companies regarding a workers' compensation award. The primary issue is the applicant's average weekly earnings, specifically the inclusion of tip income, which was not adequately substantiated by documentary evidence. The Appeals Board found the initial decision lacked substantial evidence regarding earnings and rescinded the award. The matter is remanded for further proceedings to properly develop the evidentiary record on earnings and insurance coverage dates before a new decision is issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNeda MotavakelFantastic Sam'sTower Select Insurance CompanyStar Insurance CompanyIllinois Midwest Insurance AgencyLLEndurance Workers' CompensationSouthern Insurance CompanyFirstComp Omaha
References
Case No. ADJ9170309
Regular
Nov 03, 2025

Miguel Mosqueda vs. City of Clearlake

Applicant Miguel Mosqueda sought reconsideration of a July 25, 2025 decision which found his injuries were not caused by the employer's serious and willful misconduct or violation of safety orders. Mosqueda, a maintenance worker, suffered catastrophic injuries, including paraplegia, after falling from a ladder while trimming a tree for the City of Clearlake. He contended that the employer violated several Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8 sections related to safety, training, and equipment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, adopting the WCJ's report, denied the petition for reconsideration, concluding that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct and that no alleged safety violation was the proximate cause of the accident.

Serious and willful misconductPetition for reconsiderationFindings and OrderViolation of statuteViolation of safety orderCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3203Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3276(d)(1)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3276(e)(15)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3421(b)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3421(d)
References
Case No. ADJ7181805
Regular
Sep 17, 2013

MARIA SANCHEZ vs. LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST.

This case involves a lien claimant whose lien was dismissed for failing to pay the required lien activation fee before a scheduled lien conference. The claimant argued that defense counsel informed them the conference was scheduled in error, but the Board found this was not a valid reason to avoid the fee. The Board affirmed the dismissal, emphasizing that only the Board, not private parties, can cancel a conference. The claimant was also admonished for failing to properly notify the Board of changes in representation.

Lien Activation FeePetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimLien ConferenceWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardElectronic Adjudication Management SystemDeath BenefitsOff CalendarCal. Code Regs tit. 8 § 10240(a)Lab. Code § 4903.06(a)
References
Case No. ADJ852406
Regular
Feb 24, 2015

TOK SUN SONG vs. CAFE PRINCE aka HWANG TAEJA, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses Tok Sun Song's petition for reconsideration. The dismissal is based on two grounds: the petition was filed untimely, exceeding the statutory 25-day limit after the WCJ's decision. Additionally, the petition was not verified, and the applicant failed to cure this defect or provide a valid explanation within a reasonable time after notice. As these are jurisdictional defects, the Board lacked authority to consider the untimely and unverified petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitVerification DefectCuring DefectsWCAB Rule 10508Labor Code 5900Labor Code 5903Labor Code 5902Cal. Code Regs. 10507
References
Case No. SAC 0361364
Regular
Jul 11, 2008

AMBER DeFAZIO vs. RESORT AT SQUAW CREEK, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves sanctions against defense counsel for filing improperly documented petitions and a response without permission. The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's award of temporary total disability, remanding the case to determine the precise commencement date of indemnity payments for accurate application of Labor Code section 4656. The Board also upheld the WCJ's exclusion of the employer's modified work offer exhibit as irrelevant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Cal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10842Cal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10848Incomplete Verification
References
Showing 1-10 of 10,131 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