California WCABLaw firm
Bridges Law Firm
Bridges Law Firm is named in 6 released California WCAB decisions from 2021–2025. The disputes run to AOE/COE (1) and Statute of limitations (1). They were heard most often at Oakland, then San Francisco. The firm it meets most often is Hanna, Brophy, MacLean, McAleer & Jensen (1).
- Decisions
- 6
- Years
- 2021–2025
- Issues disputed
- 2
- District offices
- 2
Applicant sideRead off how the firm is printed in the service list of its own decisions — 5 of 5 agree. It is our reading of the record, not the firm’s description of itself.
What they litigate
Disputed issues across the decisions this firm is named in. Every row opens the decisions it counts.
1 more firms appear in the same decisions and are not listed: we could not read which side they were on.
Where they appear
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.
Counted over 4 appealed decisions. Not this firm’s book of work. A decision that went one way on one issue and the other way on another is counted in both columns, so the figures add up to more than the total.
Decisions
Newest decisions this firm is named in, each with the passage the panel turned on and a link to the official PDF.
- ADJ16751221 · 2025-04-01 · Oakland District OfficeReconsideration / removalmixed
Determinative passage · p.1Lien claimant has petitioned for reconsideration of the Findings of Fact, Notice of Intention and Orders of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) which found that applicant was entitled to reasonable fees pursuant to Labor Code1 section 5813 as a result of lien claimant's sanctionable conduct. Lien claimant asserts the imposition of such sanctions are unjustified and violates their due process rights.
The Board granted reconsideration to amend the finding clarifying entitlement to fees subject to due process and affirmed the rest of the findings and orders.
Official decision · page 1 → - ADJ11811846 · 2025-01-30 · Oakland District OfficeOther disputed issueapplicant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.14Here, the record includes unrebutted evidence that (1) applicant had pre-existing disability in the form of constant pain and stiffness of the lower back with pain, numbness and tingling of the bilateral lower extremities; (2) the subsequent injury affected the opposite and corresponding extremities; and (3) the subsequent permanent disability equals 5% or more of the total disability, when considered alone and without regard to occupation or age. (Ex. Ex. 6, QME Report by Edward Cremata, October 6, 2020, pp. 4,7-11, 21; Ex. 5, Report of Debra Welshons-Cline, May 4, 2022, pp 3-4.)
The Board found unrebutted evidence that the applicant had pre-existing disabilities affecting his bilateral lower extremities and that the subsequent injury affected the opposite and corresponding extremities, with the subsequent permanent disability equaling 5% or more of the total disability when considered alone and without regard to occupation or age.
Official decision · page 14 → - ADJ6751964 · 2022-07-26 · San Francisco District OfficeOther disputed issueapplicant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.2applicant of further litigation, we conclude that the settlement amount is adequate and that the agreement is in applicant's best interest.
The Board concluded the settlement amount was adequate and in the applicant's best interest, and the attorneys' fee requested was reasonable.
Official decision · page 2 → - ADJ11415258 · 2021-04-19 · Oakland District OfficeReconsideration / removaldefendant prevailed
Determinative passage · p.3I have reviewed defendant's petition for reconsideration. Defendant has a legitimate beef with my rating of the impairment in this case.
The WCAB found the defendant's challenge to the impairment rating string valid and granted reconsideration to allow a formal rating to be obtained.
Official decision · page 3 →
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.
- BRIDGES LAW FIRM
- Bridges Law Firm
- BRIDGES LAW
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.