California WCABLaw firm

Injured Workers Law

Injured Workers Law is named in 7 released California WCAB decisions from 2024–2025. The disputes run to Sanctions under Labor Code §5813 (4), AOE/COE (1) and Temporary disability (1). They were heard most often at Los Angeles, then Van Nuys.

Decisions: 7
Years: 2024–2025
Issues disputed: 3
District offices: 3

What they litigate

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

Who they face

We could not read this firm’s own side from the record, so there is no other side to name.

Carriers and administrators

Where they appear

Los Angeles 2
Van Nuys 2
Anaheim 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 firm does its work. It describes how a set of appealed disputes came out.

4 for the defense
2 for the applicant

Counted over 6 appealed decisions. Not this firm’s book of work.

Decisions

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

ADJ19258673 · 2025-07-18 · Van Nuys District OfficeTemporary disabilityapplicant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.5Here, the WCJ's award of temporary disability indemnity was based upon the January 30,
The WCJ's award was based on substantial evidence from PQME Dr. Ehya's report, which found applicant not permanent and stationary and entitled to continuing temporary disability indemnity. Defendant failed to show modified work was offered.
Official decision · page 5 →
ADJ14951750 · 2025-07-07 · Van Nuys District OfficeAOE/COEapplicant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.7Accordingly, we grant applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, rescind the F&O and substitute a new F&O that finds that in ADJ14951750, while employed by defendant on July 15, 2021, applicant claims to have sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment to his left knee, left ankle, and left foot; that in ADJ15106978, applicant while allegedly employed by defendant on February 3, 2020 claims to have sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment to his head and neck; and that defendant was uninsured at the time of the claimed injuries. We defer all other issues. We return the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
The Appeals Board found that applicant was employed by defendant on July 15, 2021, and that applicant claimed injury arising out of and in the course of employment on both July 15, 2021 and February 3, 2020, reversing the WCJ's prior finding due to lack of substantial medical evidence and incomplete record.
Official decision · page 7 →
ADJ8965291 · 2024-05-16 · Los Angeles District OfficeSanctions under Labor Code §5813defendant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.5Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett halted trial proceedings in eight cases by filing petitions for reconsideration that were indisputably without merit and filed for the purpose of causing unnecessary delay. Most of these petitions were filed on the morning of trial without any advance notice to the court, opposing counsel, or witnesses. Their conduct was deliberate, which is evidenced by both the pattern of filing such petitions in eight separate cases and their failure to appear in each of these cases after the petition for reconsideration was filed.
The petitions for reconsideration were filed with willful intent to disrupt or delay proceedings, were indisputably without merit, and caused significant delays and resource waste, warranting full sanctions.
Official decision · page 5 →
ADJ15382349 · 2024-04-10Sanctions under Labor Code §5813defendant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.1We previously granted removal in these matters on our own motion to provide an opportunity to study and address the issues of sanctions and costs under Labor Code section 58131. Having completed our review, we now issue an Order of Consolidation and a Notice of Intent to Impose Sanctions and Costs (En Banc).
The Appeals Board found that Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett filed petitions for reconsideration with willful intent to disrupt or delay proceedings, which were indisputably without merit, justifying sanctions and costs.
Official decision · page 1 →
ADJ8965291 · 2024-04-10Sanctions under Labor Code §5813defendant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.20NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that absent written objection in which good cause to the contrary is demonstrated, within twenty (20) days plus five (5) additional days for mailing (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10605(a)(1), 10600) after service of this Notice that pursuant to Labor Code section 5813 and Appeals Board Rule 10421 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10421) the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board will order SUSAN GARRETT (CA BAR #195580), to pay sanctions and reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, as follows:
Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett repeatedly filed petitions for reconsideration of non-final orders, with the apparent intent to delay trial dates after being denied continuances, despite prior notice that such petitions were improper and sanctionable.
Official decision · page 20 →
ADJ10451326 · 2024-03-08 · Anaheim District OfficeReconsideration / removalmixed
Determinative passage · p.1On January 5, 2024, lien claimant, AV Management, filed a Petition for Reconsideration or in the Alternative Petition for Removal contending, in essence, that the September 28, 2023 Minute Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), which set this matter for trial was not properly served. We have considered the allegations of the Petitions and the contents of the Report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record and for the reasons stated below, we will dismiss the petition to the extent that it seeks reconsideration and we will grant removal on motion of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) pursuant to Labor Code section 5310.
The September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting the matter for trial is not a final order and thus not subject to reconsideration; removal to the Appeals Board is granted as an extraordinary remedy under Labor Code section 5310.
Official decision · page 1 →

Also recorded as

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

INJURED WORKERS LAW
Injured Workers Law
INJURED WORKERS LAW GROUP
Injured Workers Law Group

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

Also on this

Private workspace

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

Paste the dispute. The extractor builds the factors, the search finds the decisions the same facts won, and the matter stays saved. Free account.

Start a matter Search without an account →

Injured Workers Law

Decisions

Years

2024–2025

Issues disputed

District offices

How the appealed decisions came out

4 for the defense

2 for the applicant

Counted over 6 appealed decisions. Not this firm’s book of work.

Decisions

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

ADJ19258673 · 2025-07-18 · Van Nuys District OfficeTemporary disabilityapplicant prevailed

Determinative passage · p.5Here, the WCJ's award of temporary disability indemnity was based upon the January 30,

The WCJ's award was based on substantial evidence from PQME Dr. Ehya's report, which found applicant not permanent and stationary and entitled to continuing temporary disability indemnity. Defendant failed to show modified work was offered.

Official decision · page 5 →

ADJ14951750 · 2025-07-07 · Van Nuys District OfficeAOE/COEapplicant prevailed

Determinative passage · p.7Accordingly, we grant applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, rescind the F&O and substitute a new F&O that finds that in ADJ14951750, while employed by defendant on July 15, 2021, applicant claims to have sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment to his left knee, left ankle, and left foot; that in ADJ15106978, applicant while allegedly employed by defendant on February 3, 2020 claims to have sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment to his head and neck; and that defendant was uninsured at the time of the claimed injuries. We defer all other issues. We return the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

The Appeals Board found that applicant was employed by defendant on July 15, 2021, and that applicant claimed injury arising out of and in the course of employment on both July 15, 2021 and February 3, 2020, reversing the WCJ's prior finding due to lack of substantial medical evidence and incomplete record.

Official decision · page 7 →

ADJ8965291 · 2024-05-16 · Los Angeles District OfficeSanctions under Labor Code §5813defendant prevailed

Determinative passage · p.5Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett halted trial proceedings in eight cases by filing petitions for reconsideration that were indisputably without merit and filed for the purpose of causing unnecessary delay. Most of these petitions were filed on the morning of trial without any advance notice to the court, opposing counsel, or witnesses. Their conduct was deliberate, which is evidenced by both the pattern of filing such petitions in eight separate cases and their failure to appear in each of these cases after the petition for reconsideration was filed.

The petitions for reconsideration were filed with willful intent to disrupt or delay proceedings, were indisputably without merit, and caused significant delays and resource waste, warranting full sanctions.

Official decision · page 5 →

ADJ15382349 · 2024-04-10Sanctions under Labor Code §5813defendant prevailed

Determinative passage · p.1We previously granted removal in these matters on our own motion to provide an opportunity to study and address the issues of sanctions and costs under Labor Code section 58131. Having completed our review, we now issue an Order of Consolidation and a Notice of Intent to Impose Sanctions and Costs (En Banc).

The Appeals Board found that Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett filed petitions for reconsideration with willful intent to disrupt or delay proceedings, which were indisputably without merit, justifying sanctions and costs.

Official decision · page 1 →

ADJ8965291 · 2024-04-10Sanctions under Labor Code §5813defendant prevailed

Determinative passage · p.20NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that absent written objection in which good cause to the contrary is demonstrated, within twenty (20) days plus five (5) additional days for mailing (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10605(a)(1), 10600) after service of this Notice that pursuant to Labor Code section 5813 and Appeals Board Rule 10421 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10421) the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board will order SUSAN GARRETT (CA BAR #195580), to pay sanctions and reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, as follows:

Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett repeatedly filed petitions for reconsideration of non-final orders, with the apparent intent to delay trial dates after being denied continuances, despite prior notice that such petitions were improper and sanctionable.

Official decision · page 20 →

ADJ10451326 · 2024-03-08 · Anaheim District OfficeReconsideration / removalmixed

Determinative passage · p.1On January 5, 2024, lien claimant, AV Management, filed a Petition for Reconsideration or in the Alternative Petition for Removal contending, in essence, that the September 28, 2023 Minute Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), which set this matter for trial was not properly served. We have considered the allegations of the Petitions and the contents of the Report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record and for the reasons stated below, we will dismiss the petition to the extent that it seeks reconsideration and we will grant removal on motion of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) pursuant to Labor Code section 5310.

The September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting the matter for trial is not a final order and thus not subject to reconsideration; removal to the Appeals Board is granted as an extraordinary remedy under Labor Code section 5310.

Official decision · page 1 →