John Emerson Durr #206206 License Status: Active Address: Division of Workers' Compensation, 4740 Allene Way Ste 100, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-8736

The Administrative Law Judge Division includes over 70 Administrative Law Judges and over 65 staff. The mission of the Administrative Law Judge Division is to provide an independent forum that ensures fair, unbiased, reasoned, and efficient disposition of proceedings.

The ALJ Biographical Information search allow users to look up the basic information about the Administrative Law Judge who is part of your case, hearing, mediation or other case event.

Information about John Durr E working as Presiding Workers' Compensation Judge for State of California.

Jul 6, 2021 · State Farm Insurance Company by and through their attorney of record, filed a timely and verified Petition for Reconsideration challenging the decision issued by WCJ John Durr alleging only that the finding AOE/COE to the thoracic spine was unsupported by the evidence.

Applicant seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact, Award, and Order (F&A) issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on September 27, 2022, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to her cervical spine, lumbar spine, a...

As Workers' Compensation Judge at State of California John E Durr made $143,566 in total compensation.

John G. Johnson joined the State Personnel Board as an Administrative Law Judge in May of 2016. Prior to joining the State Personnel Board, Mr. Johnson was a partner at the law firm of Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, now known as Dentons, first in their Chicago office, then in their San Francisco office.

Administrative Law Judges assigned to Range A are in the recruitment and development level designed to gain experience in administrative hearings in order to develop skills to accept more complex hearing assignments.

Administrative Law Judge Decisions. Decisions of Administrative Law Judges are binding on the parties in the particular matter but do not have precedential value. They should not be cited or relied on as precedent in any proceeding. Decisions posted here may not be final and may be subject to modification by the Appeals Board and the Courts.