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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
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. ADJ7039301
Regular
Mar 16, 2011

ROBLY HART vs. LA JOLLA PACIFIC/DRR NEFF & ASSOCIATES, OAKS RIVER INSURANCE/BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

This case concerns Robly Hart's workers' compensation claim for an injury sustained in a motorcycle accident. The applicant was a construction consultant who used his motorcycle for work, traveling between home, job sites, and interviews. The primary dispute centers on whether the accident occurred during the course and scope of his employment, with conflicting evidence regarding his activities and timeline leading up to the incident. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report that found the applicant's testimony lacked credibility due to inconsistent statements and timeline discrepancies.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Findings and OrderCourse of EmploymentConstruction ConsultantBuilding InspectorMotorcycle TravelJob Sites
References
Case No. ADJ473373 (ANA 0406381)
Regular
Feb 10, 2012

FERNANDO GUTIERREZ vs. SOCAL FRAMING aka BMHC; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE, administered by ESIS, INC.

This case concerns applicant's claim for extended temporary disability (TD) benefits beyond 104 weeks due to a left eye injury. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of the "amputation" exception, ruling that the surgical removal of an eye does not fit the statutory definition. However, the Board remanded the case for further development of the record on the "high-velocity eye injury" exception, as the velocity and force of the object that struck the applicant's eye were unclear. The applicant's Petition for Removal was dismissed as reconsideration was the appropriate remedy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFernando GutierrezSoCal FramingBMHCACE American InsuranceESISInc.ADJ473373ANA 0406381Opinion and Decision
References
Case No. ADJ10195356
Regular
Dec 05, 2010

MICHAEL PEARSALL vs. CSJ SAIZ CONSTRUCTION, APPLIED RISK SERVICES

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, ADJ10195356, involves Michael Pearsall as the applicant and CSJ Saiz Construction and Applied Risk Services as defendants. The Board issued an order dismissing the applicant's Petition for Removal. This dismissal is due to the petitioner voluntarily withdrawing the petition that sought removal of a prior decision.

Petition for RemovalDismissalApplicantDefendantCSJ Saiz ConstructionApplied Risk ServicesMichael PearsallADJ10195356Fresno District OfficeAugust 16 2016
References
Case No. ADJ11084134, ADJ11084352
Regular
Apr 17, 2023

Denisha Johnson vs. defendant

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petitioner's petitions for reconsideration. While accepting supplemental pleadings, the Board noted the petitioner failed to follow proper procedure for filing them. The underlying facts involve an employee injured on a construction site due to a floor collapse, with subsequent medical evaluations and ongoing litigation. Ultimately, the Board upheld the prior determination, denying the request to revisit the decision.

Petitions for ReconsiderationSupplemental PleadingsCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10964Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeniedApplicantEmployerConstruction SitesKnee InjuryWrist Injury
References
Case No. ADJ8067157
Regular
Nov 30, 2012

MARISOL PERALTA vs. FROZEN YOGURT OF VALLEY VILLAGE, INC., STAR INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to further develop the record regarding applicant Marisol Peralta's alleged industrial injury. The WCAB rescinded the prior decision finding an injury, citing that the medical opinions were not substantial evidence as they lacked definitive causation findings and weren't based on complete medical histories. Crucially, neither physician reviewed applicant's full medical records, and one deferred causation due to pregnancy while the other awaited X-ray results. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMarisol PeraltaFrozen Yogurt of Valley VillageInc.Star Insurance Co.Illinois Midwest Insurance AgencyLLCADJ8067157Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ9419247
Regular
Aug 09, 2016

GUADALUPE ALVAREZ vs. CITY WALL CONSTRUCTION, THE HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a prior order finding the applicant was not an employee of City Wall Construction. The applicant claimed a work injury to his back and foot, but the judge found his testimony regarding employment lacked credibility against the defendant's consistent testimony. The Board also rejected the applicant's request to reopen based on newly discovered evidence, as he failed to demonstrate due diligence in discovering and presenting this information at trial. Therefore, the applicant did not meet his burden of proof to establish an employer-employee relationship.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGuadalupe AlvarezCity Wall ConstructionThe Hartford Insurance CompanyADJ9419247denial of reconsiderationindustrial injuryconstruction workeremployment statusnewly discovered evidence
References
Case No. ADJ7485185, ADJ9885267
Regular
Sep 18, 2017

LAURA ORTIZ vs. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP, MID CENTURY INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies a petition for reconsideration, affirming the applicant's timely invocation of jurisdiction to seek additional benefits. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the applicant's filings of an Application for Adjudication of Claim and an Amended Application, along with documented medical evidence of worsening condition, satisfied the requirements for reopening and seeking further compensation. These actions put the defendants on notice of the applicant's intent to pursue increased benefits, even without a formal petition to reopen.

Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5410Application for Adjudication of ClaimRiel v. State of CaliforniaBeaida v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.stipulated awardpro perfuture medical treatmentincreased symptomsworsening condition
References
Case No. SAC 357129
Regular
Sep 24, 2007

MICHAEL HANCOCK vs. TOWNSEND & SCHMIDT MASONRY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant injured in a car accident while commuting to work, with the employer arguing the "going and coming" rule barred recovery. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a finding that the applicant's injuries were industrial, holding that the rule did not apply. The Board reasoned that the applicant's use of his personal vehicle to transport tools, the potential for inter-job site travel, and the employer's travel pay policy conferred a benefit to the employer, thus justifying an exception to the rule.

going and coming ruleindustrial injuryautomobile accidentcommutebrick tendercourse of employmentWCJpetition for reconsiderationemployer benefitwork materials
References
Showing 1-10 of 10,990 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