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. GRO 024430
En Banc
Dec 08, 2004

Myron Abney vs. Aera Energy, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

The Appeals Board held that the amended Labor Code section 5814, which changed penalty calculations for unreasonable delay of compensation, applies to delays that occurred before its June 1, 2004 operative date, if the finding of unreasonableness is made on or after that date.

SB 899Labor Code section 5814unreasonable delaypenaltyoperative datetemporary disability indemnityHofmeister v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.prior to operative dateon or after operative dateconclusive presumption
References
Case No. ADJ602790 (STK 0179563)
Regular
Jul 17, 2012

TRACEE MAWYER vs. GALLO GLASS COMPANY

This case involves Tracee Mawyer's workers' compensation claim against Gallo Glass Company for cumulative trauma injuries. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the trial judge's denial of injury to applicant's bilateral upper extremities, specifically carpal tunnel syndrome. The Board found Dr. Clayman's reports sufficiently supported an industrial injury to the upper extremities and awarded additional temporary disability for the period following carpal tunnel surgery. The case was returned for a new permanent disability rating for the upper extremity injuries.

Cumulative traumabilateral upper extremitiescarpal tunnel release surgerytemporary disabilitypermanent disability ratingreconsiderationDr. Claymanneck injuryshoulder injuryspine injury
References
Case No. ADJ4198621 (VNO 0495392)
Regular
Sep 28, 2012

ANTONIO BARBUTO (Deceased), ADRIANA BARBUTO MIGLIANO (Widow) vs. SIEMERS ENGINEERING COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a dispute over the decedent's earning capacity for calculating death benefits following his fatal industrial injury. The defendant, SCIF, argues the judge's finding that the decedent was promoted to backhoe operator and had the earning capacity of that role lacks substantial evidence. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the matter for further proceedings due to an inadequate record. The Board emphasized the need for a proper evidentiary record detailing the decedent's employment, qualifications, and earnings before a determination can be made.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boarddeath benefitsearning capacitybackhoe operatorpromotionactual wagesLabor Code section 4453average weekly earningsunion representativeprevailing hourly wage
References
Case No. ADJ10597372
Regular
Apr 13, 2020

KATORIA JONES vs. THRIFT RECYCLING, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the original Findings, Award and Order. The Board found that the applicant's occupational group number should be 360 (porters and packers) rather than 230 (machine operators and tenders). This amendment was based on the applicant's job duties as a warehouse line loader involving lifting, sorting, and moving boxes. The Board deferred issues of permanent disability and attorney's fees, returning the case to the trial level for further proceedings with the corrected occupational group number.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOccupational Group NumberSorterWarehouse workerLine loaderPDRSPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleFindings Award and OrderIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ9637766
Regular
Apr 24, 2018

ERIKA CHAVEZ vs. WEST COAST WAREHOUSE, INC., HARTFORD INSURANCE

Here is a summary for a lawyer in four sentences: This case involves a lien claimant seeking to correct a clerical error in filing a declaration under Labor Code section 4903.05, which resulted in their lien being dismissed by operation of law in the EAMS system. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal, ruling that the issue of whether the lien claimant is entitled to correct the error and remove the dismissal notation should be determined by a Workers' Compensation Judge. The Board emphasized that lien claimants, like other parties, are entitled to due process, including a hearing on whether dismissal should be set aside due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. This ensures a hearing on the merits, consistent with the policy favoring the resolution of disputes on substantive grounds.

Labor Code section 4903.05Lien claimantPetition for RemovalDismissal by operation of lawClerical errorLien Reservation Number (LRN)Electronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Supplemental Lien FormCompromise and ReleaseDue process
References
Case No. ADJ8667280
Regular
Apr 17, 2013

JOSE REFUGIO BLANCO vs. METROPOLITAN AUTOMOTIVE WAREHOUSE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE CO.

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves an applicant, Jose Refugio Blanco, and defendants Metropolitan Automotive Warehouse and California Insurance Co. The applicant filed a Petition for Removal, but the Board has denied this petition. The denial is based on the findings and reasoning presented in the administrative law judge's report, which the Board has adopted and incorporated. Therefore, the Petition for Removal has been formally denied by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportDenying RemovalMetropolitan Automotive WarehouseCalifornia Insurance Co.Applied Risk ServicesADJ8667280Marina del Rey District OfficeAlfonso J. Moresi
References
Case No. ADJ9813999
Regular
Jan 31, 2018

JOSEPH MORGAN vs. SYSTEMS OPERATIONS SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a previous finding that applicant Joseph Morgan was an independent contractor. The WCAB found that Morgan was an employee of Systems Operations Services (SOS) because SOS exercised pervasive control over his work. Factors supporting this decision include SOS providing tools, housing, and a vehicle, dictating work hours and locations, and Morgan's work being an integral part of SOS's core business. The WCAB determined that SOS failed to prove Morgan was an independent contractor excluded from workers' compensation coverage.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationIndependent ContractorEmployeeRight to ControlBorello factorsWastewater Treatment Plant OperatorSOSState Compensation Insurance FundAOE/COE
References
Case No. GRO 024430
Significant
Dec 08, 2004

Myron Abney vs. AERA ENERGY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This en banc decision holds that the revised Labor Code section 5814, operative June 1, 2004, applies to unreasonable delays in compensation payments that occurred prior to its operative date, provided the finding of unreasonable delay is made on or after that date.

SB 899Labor Code Section 5814En Banc DecisionReconsiderationTemporary Disability IndemnityPenaltyUnreasonable DelayOperative DateStatute of LimitationsConclusive Presumption
References
Case No. ADJ1463130
Regular
Jun 30, 2010

SAUL POLOMINO-MADRIGAL vs. TRI-CITY LINEN SUPPLY CO., TRAVELERS INSURANCE

This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation judge's order disallowing its lien for medical equipment. The claimant argued it had a physician's prescription, but the judge disallowed the lien due to a lack of expert medical opinion on the actual need for the equipment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration. This dismissal was based on the petition being filed approximately one week beyond the jurisdictional 25-day deadline after the original order was served by mail.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for reconsiderationUntimely filingFindings and OrderExpert medical opinionMedical equipmentPrescriptionTreating physicianLabor Code section 5903
References
Case No. LAO 838220
Regular
May 14, 2007

MARIA SERAFIN vs. LANSCO DIE CASTING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the previous award, and remanded the case to determine permanent disability using the 1997 Schedule. This decision stems from the Board's finding that the applicant's treating physician's December 20, 2004, report indicated the existence of permanent disability, triggering an exception under Labor Code section 4660(d). Consequently, the outdated 1997 Schedule, not the 2005 Schedule, must be applied to calculate the applicant's permanent disability benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria SerafinLansco Die CastingState Compensation Insurance FundLAO 838220ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJIndustrial InjuryRight Shoulder
References
Showing 1-10 of 353 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