Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd.

What they litigate

Disputed issues across the decisions this insurance carrier is named in. Every row opens the decisions it counts.

• AOE/COE2
• Jurisdiction / venue1

Where they appear

• Fresno 1
• Pomona 1
• Salinas 1
• San Francisco 1
• Van Nuys 1

How the appealed decisions came out

These are decisions that were appealed and published — the tail of a system that mostly settles. Most claims end in a compromise and release or a stipulation and never reach a panel, so nothing below describes how this insurance carrier does its work. It describes how a set of appealed disputes came out.

• 3 for the applicant
• 1 for the defense
• 1 returned for more record

Counted over 5 appealed decisions. Not this insurance carrier’s book of work.

Decisions

Newest decisions this insurance carrier is named in, each with the passage the panel turned on and a link to the official PDF.

• ADJ19483679 · 2026-05-15 · San Francisco District OfficeJurisdiction / venuedefendant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.4On February 9, 2026, the WCJ issued his Finding of Fact, determining that "California does not have subject matter jurisdiction" over applicant's claim. (Finding of Fact, at p. 2.) The Opinion on Decision, issued concurrently, explains that the WCJ's decision was based upon a finding that applicant was hired in Florida, worked in Florida, and sustained her alleged injuries there. (Opinion on Decision, at pp. 5§ 6.) The WCJ noted that the employment contract, while referencing the laws of California, did not reference workers' compensation law. (Id. at pp. 5, 7.)

  Applicant was hired in Florida, worked in Florida, and sustained injuries in Florida; no statutory basis for California subject matter jurisdiction exists despite contract law choice of California law and remote supervision from California.

  Official decision · page 4 →
• ADJ14033416 · 2023-07-03 · Salinas District OfficeAOE/COEapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.4The court reviewed the evidence submitted by the parties, both documentary and testamentary. Based on the same, including, but not limited to, the testimony of the applicant, and medical reporting of Court Appointed Regular Physician Bruce J. Dreyfuss, M.D. dated February 13, 2023, and February 20, 2023, it was found that applicant sustained injury AOE/COE on March 12, 2020, as a result of contracting COVID-19 and compensable sequences thereof.

  The WCJ found that applicant sustained injury AOE/COE on March 12, 2020, from contracting COVID-19 at work, supported by substantial medical evidence from Dr. Dreyfuss showing increased risk compared to the general public.

  Official decision · page 4 →
• ADJ13315589 · 2022-08-12 · Van Nuys District OfficeAOE/COEremanded

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Order (F&O) issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on May 23, 2022, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that the applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) in the form of COVID-19, resulting in injury to his internal organs and causing his death.1

  The WCAB found no substantial evidence on injury AOE/COE causation in the record and granted reconsideration to develop the record further, rescinding the prior Findings and Order.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ21560862 · 2025-12-05 · Pomona District OfficeReconsideration / removalapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. (Cortez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596, 599, fn. 5 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 155]; Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274, 280, fn. 2 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 133].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate

  Applicant resides in Los Angeles County and is permitted to file the application at any district office within the county; the order changing venue to Marina del Rey was improper and would cause substantial prejudice and irreparable harm to applicant; removal is granted to rescind the order and deny defendant's petition for change of venue.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ9046738 · 2025-10-03 · Fresno District OfficeReconsideration / removalapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.10Although we have preliminarily considered the Petition for Reconsideration, the WCJ's Report, and the record in this matter, we are not persuaded that the record is properly developed on one or more of the above issues, including whether there was a timely made and timely communicated UR determination for each of Dr. Foxley's RFAs, and if not, how the MTUS applies to each specific request for treatment. Accordingly, taking into account the statutory time constraints for acting on the petitions, and based upon our initial review of the record, we believe reconsideration must be granted to allow sufficient opportunity to further study the factual and legal issues in this case. Thereafter, a final decision after reconsideration will be issued by the Appeals Board, from which any aggrieved person may timely seek a writ of review pursuant to Labor Code section 5950 et seq.

  The WCAB granted reconsideration to allow further review of the merits and the entire record due to unresolved factual and legal issues regarding utilization review and medical necessity.

  Official decision · page 10 →

Also recorded as

The same insurance carrier is printed several ways across the decisions, and all of them were counted as one. This is every spelling behind the figures above.

• Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd.
• Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd
• SENTINEL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD
• Sentinel Insurance Company

Is this your company and something here is wrong? Tell us and we will fix it. Every figure on this page is a count of released decisions this insurance carrier is named in, and the decisions themselves are listed above with the passage each turned on.