Michael Burgis

Top rated Workers' Compensation attorney in Sherman Oaks, California

Michael Burgis & Associates, P.C.
Michael Burgis
Michael Burgis & Associates, P.C.
888-227-1344
Contact me today

Practice Areas: Workers' Compensation, Employment & Labor, Personal Injury; view more

Licensed in California since: 2008

Education: Southwestern Law School

Selected to Super Lawyers: 2021 - 2023 Selected to Rising Stars: 2014 - 2020

Call today:
888-227-1344

Contact me today

Michael Burgis & Associates, P.C.

5900 Sepulveda Blvd
Suite 215
Sherman Oaks, CA 91411 Visit website

Michael Burgis is the founder and managing partner of Michael Burgis & Associates, P.C., located in Sherman Oaks, California. Mr. Burgis is a ceritfied Legal Specialist in Workers' Compensation and a Trial attorney. Providing aggressive and superior representation to his clients in Southern California and throughout the state, he focuses his practice on workers' compensation, employment law and catastrophic personal injury cases.

Prior to attending law school, Mr. Burgis received his Bachelor of Science in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles, in 2003. He then went on to pursue his legal education at Southwestern Law School, from where he was awarded his Juris Doctor in 2008.

Following law school, Mr. Burgis went on to work for a well-known workers' compensation law firm in Pasadena, California. During his tenure there, he quickly rose through the ranks by establishing himself as a go-to litigator for the firm and his clients, setting records for settlements and verdicts earned. In 2010, Pasadena Magazine named Mr. Burgis as a top attorney due to his successes. Since forming Michael Burgis & Associates, P.C., he has secured numerous seven-figure settlements and verdicts as well as disability awards for his clients.

Mr. Burgis has been licensed to practice law before all of the state courts of California since 2008. During his career, he has had the opportunity to litigate hundreds of cases before the state's Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. In one of his representative cases, he successfully argued on behalf of an injured client in front of the 2nd District Court of Appeal, which upheld a previous ruling of the WCAB awarding permanent disability benefits.

Mr. Burgis has also successfully taken Civil cases to a jury verdict, argued in from of the Court of Appeal and defended the verdict all the way to the California Supreme Court.

Mr. Burgis is re-defining legal representation and brining recovery to the injury.

Practice areas

Workers' Compensation: Claimant, Employment & Labor: Employee, Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff

Focus areas

Brain Injury, Employment Law - Employee, Motor Vehicle Accidents, Personal Injury - Plaintiff, Sexual Harassment, Slip and Fall, Wage & Hour Laws, Wrongful Death

  • 60% Workers' Compensation: Claimant
  • 30% Employment & Labor: Employee
  • 10% Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff

First Admitted: 2008, California

Professional Webpage: https://www.burgislaw.com/our-team/michael-burgis/

Educational Background:
  • University of California, Los Angeles, B.S. in Economics with a minor in Political Science, 2003
Bar/Professional Activity:
  • California Bar, 2008
Special Licenses/Certifications:
  • Legal Certified Specialist in California Workers' Compensation, 2015
Videos:
  • California Workers’ Compensation case law review – Lopez vs. General Wax -LC §4660.1 does not preclude the collection of temporary disability benefits. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of California Workers’ Compensation Lopez vs. General Wax where the ruling cites Labor Code 4660.1 and the exceptions to Labor Code 4660.1 like catastrophic injuries. I. THE RULING LC 4660.1 does not preclude the collection of temporary disability benefits. II. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND “Applicant worked as a candle maker for defendant for approximately 14 years and sustained an admitted industrial injury on February 28, 2014, when her right index finger became stuck in a machine and subsequently a piece of her finger was chopped off resulting in a partial amputation of the finger. Applicant also suffered compensable injuries to her psyche, gastrointestinal system, and in the form of hypertension.” “Applicant produced vocational expert testimony that applicant's injury has resulted in a complete loss of earnings capacity. Defendant did not provide any testimony in rebuttal. The WCJ relied upon applicant's vocational expert and found that applicant suffered a permanent and total disability.” “Here, the WCJ found that applicant sustained an industrial injury to her psyche. Applicant argued that the impairment caused by applicant's psychiatric disorder was compensable pursuant to LC 4660.1(c), because the injury, which caused a partial amputation of the index finger, was the direct cause of her psychiatric injury and, in the alternative, that the injury constituted both a "violent act" and a “catastrophic injury". III. DISCUSSION “Defendant argues that applicant is not entitled to temporary disability from her psychiatric injury pursuant to LC 4660.1(c). First, as explained above, applicant's injury constituted a violent act and thus applicant is within the exception of LC 4660.1(c). However, it is important to clarify that LC 4660.1(c) is a statute governing the collection of permanent disability benefits. The statute does not preclude the collection of temporary disability benefits. Even if applicant's injury had not constituted an exception to LC 4660.1(c), temporary disability would be compensable.” A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation, employment law expert in the state of California, managing attorney for MB&A Lawyer Michael Burgis provides this summary of how earnings are relevant to California Workers' Compensation claims to inform and increase awareness for potentially injured workers and the general public watching this video. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION., Lopez vs. General Wax -LC §4660.1 does not preclude the collection of temporary disability benefits, Worker's Compensation, 2019
  • California Workers’ Compensation case law review – Zarafi Vs. Group One Automotive – What constitutes a “violent act” for the purposes of awarding psychiatric disability; an exception to LC Section 4660.1 exclusion of compensable psychiatric disability. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of California Workers’ Compensation Zarafi Vs Group One Automotive where the ruling cites Labor Code 4660.1 and the exceptions to Labor Code 4660.1 like violent acts or catastrophic injuries where psychiatric permanent disability is compensable regardless of whether that was a compensable consequence of the original injury. What constitutes a violent act ? I. THE RULING LC 4660.1 bars increases for Psych WPI that are a compensable consequence of a physical injury, unless the psych injury is a result of “violent act” or “catastrophic injury.” Applicant’s fall against a glass wall did not trigger a psych injury that would qualify for an exception. II. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On 6.2.2013, Mr. Zarifi, a finance manager, accidentally walked into a glass wall. “Applicant testified that he was walking towards what he thought was a hallway and he was walking fast because he was in a rush. The glass did not break. He did not fall. He stumbled backwards, but he did not fall. He did not lose consciousness, but he did go dark for a few moments. He was not bleeding.” III. DISCUSSION The WCAB held, “We find no support on this record for applicant's claim that he was a victim of a violent act or suffered a catastrophic injury in the form of a severe head injury, as those terms are used in LC 4660.1.” A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation, employment law expert in the state of California, managing attorney for MB&A Lawyer Michael Burgis provides this summary of how earnings are relevant to California Workers' Compensation claims to inform and increase awareness for potentially injured workers and the general public watching this video. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits, Zarafi Vs Group One Automotive–What constitutes a “violent act” when awarding psychiatric disability, Worker's Compensation, 2019
  • California Workers’ Compensation work accident case law review – Galindo vs. American Medical Response – Defendant’s legal obligation to conduct a reasonable, good faith investigation and timely provide benefits. Los Angeles workers compensation Attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief review of the Galindo vs. American Medical Response work comp case. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of California Workers’ Compensation Galindo vs. American Medical Response where the ruling cites to both Labor Code Section 4600; and Rule and Regulation 10109. I. THE RULING “Defendants have a regulatory duty to conduct a reasonable and good faith investigation to determine whether benefits are due.” (LC 4600 & 8 CCR 10109.) II. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Birgit Galindo, employed as a paramedic, sustained an industrial cumulative trauma ending 9/13/2015 to her back, bilateral hips, stress, psyche and PTSD. “On March 10, 2016, applicant was evaluated by Peter Turek, M.D., the psychiatric PQME. On March 25, 2016, Dr. Turek issued his first report finding that applicant developed a Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of the repeated exposure to traumatic situations in the course of a long career as an emergency first-responder.: The WCAB affirmed the Judge’s decision to set case for trial, rather than allow defendant further time for additional discovery, because Defendant waited 8 months after doctor’s diagnosis of PTSD to set the doctor’s deposition. III. DISCUSSION The WCAB explained: “Regulation 10109(a) states that a claims administrator must conduct a reasonable and timely investigation upon receiving notice or knowledge of an injury or claim for workers' compensation benefits.” “Regulation 10109(b) notes that a reasonable investigation must attempt to obtain the information needed to determine and timely provide each benefit which may be due an employee. Regulation 10109(b)(1) goes on to state that the administrator may not restrict its investigation to preparing objections or defenses to a claim, but must fully and fairly gather the pertinent information, whether that information requires or excuses benefit payment. Finally, Reg. 10109(e) states that insurers shall deal fairly and in good faith with all claimants.” “The actual facts in this case appear to show that the employer denied applicant's claim of cumulative trauma injury to her psyche based on two medical reports which document a fundamental misunderstanding of basic workers' compensation concepts. Despite the Panel QME's diagnosis of PTSD and finding of industrial injury in March 2016, it was not until October 2016 that defendant decided to schedule the deposition of Dr. Turek to question him on causation and the proper psychological diagnosis. As noted above, defendant has an affirmative duty to conduct a reasonable and timely investigate into applicant's claim of injury and not simply attempt to rebut applicant's evidence.” A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation, employment law expert in the state of California, managing attorney for MB&A Lawyer Michael Burgis provides this summary of how earnings are relevant to California Workers' Compensation claims to inform and increase awareness for potentially injured workers and the general public watching this video. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION., Galindo vs. American Medical Response–Defendant’s obligation to conduct a good faith investigation., Worker's Compensation, 2019
  • California Workers’ Compensation case law review – Casado Vs. Kaiser – A neutral physician or qme whose report is not substantial medical evidence and does not comply with the law is inadmissible. How your work accident lawyer can use this in trial to obtain justice for the injured worker. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of California Workers’ Compensation Casado vs Kaiser where QME's report admissibility comes into question based on Labor Code 4628.b since the QME did not disclose the name and qualifications of the individual who measured the injured worker impairment. I. THE RULING “QME's report is inadmissible because the QME did not disclose the name and qualifications of the individual who measured applicant disability with the Jamar dynamometer. Applicant also contends that the QME's permanent impairment ratings are not substantial evidence because he applied an incorrect legal theory.” II. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Rose Casado, sustained injuries to her cervical spine, shoulders and wrists, employed as a pharmacist, during a cumulative trauma period ending 9/10/2014. A QME was selected. He and his assistants performed an evaluation on applicant. The QME issued a report and his deposition was taken. Applicant argued that his report should be stricken from the record, since he failed to comply with the requirements of LC 4628, and his conclusions were based on an incorrect legal theory. III. DISCUSSION During his deposition, when the QME was asked which of his assistants performed the various measurements, he replied, “I have no idea. There's three of them that work with me. Any one of them could have done it.” LC 4628(b) requires that the physician “disclose the name and qualifications of each person who performed any services in connection with the report, including diagnostic studies, other than its clerical preparation.” LC 4628(e) provides: “Failure to comply with the requirements of this section shall make the report inadmissible as evidence and shall eliminate any liability for payment of any medical-legal expense incurred in connection with the report.” Also, medical-legal conclusion can’t be based on an incorrect legal theory. When asked about the basis for his finding of no rateable impairment for applicant’s cervical spine, wrists or hands at his deposition, the QME responded, “So I'm not going to give her a ratable impairment when she has zero objective findings. I don't care how high her subjective complaints are…We can go through this as much as you want, but she's going to get the zero impairment rating from me forever. You have to find one of those applicant guys who has no conscience… maybe he’ll give her a higher impairment rating.” Citing the case of City of Sacramento v. WCAB (Cannon) (2013) 222 Cal App 4th 1360, the WCAB explained that “A physician may provide an impairment rating greater than zero, based solely on subjective complaints if he or she finds that alternate rating to most accurately reflect the injured employee's impairment.” Given that the QME based his conclusion on an inaccurate legal theory, his report can’t constitute substantial medical evidence on that issue. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation, employment law expert in the state of California, managing attorney for MB&A Lawyer Michael Burgis provides this summary of how earnings are relevant to California Workers' Compensation claims to inform and increase awareness for potentially injured workers and the general public watching this video. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. work accident happens. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION., Casado vs Kaiser–Neutral physician reports based on unsubstantial medical evidence are inadmissible, Worker's Compensation, 2019
  • In this video, Los Angeles workers compensation Attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of how injured worker's earnings are essential to their Workers' Compensation cases. Most injured workers don't realize that their pay stubs or their incomes are highly relevant to what their legal entitlement will be when filing a claim for workers compensation benefits in California. Your earnings for the last year; based on your injury date are extremely relevant since those numbers will be used to determine what your temporary disability rate is when the doctor or doctors administering treatment has provided temporary work restrictions that your employer cannot accommodate or certify you to be temporarily or permanently disabled. Providing your attorney with detailed, accurate employment history records and pay stubs for every job position you have worked ( including multiple concurrent jobs ), might help substantially increase your potential legal entitlement in the order of the thousands of dollars. Depending on the case, a few dollars in miscalculation could mean hundreds of thousands of dollars over the life expectancy for an injured worker on 100% disability claim. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation, employment law expert in the state of California, managing attorney for MB&A Lawyer Michael Burgis provides this summary of how earnings are relevant to California Workers' Compensation claims to inform and increase awareness for potentially injured workers and the general public watching this video. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits Give us a call at 1-(855)-Burgis-1. We're here to help, and we bring “Recovery to the injured.” For a free consultation, visit: www.BurgisLaw.com, How are my earnings relevant to my case benefits - California Worker's Compensation, Worker's Compensation, 2019
  • Workers Compensation California case law review – Reyes v. Northridge – Defendant’s legal obligation to conduct a good faith investigation and timely provide benefits, including home health care in work accident case. Los Angeles employment law and workers compensation Attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief review of the Reyes vs Northridge work comp case. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert attorney in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of California Workers’ Compensation Reyes vs Northridge where the ruling cites to both Labor Code Section 4600; and Rule and Regulation 10109. I. THE RULING “Defendants have a regulatory duty to conduct a reasonable and good faith investigation to determine whether benefits are due.” (LC 4600 & 8 CCR 10109) II. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The WCAB explained: “Applicant, while employed as a truck driver on February 15, 2002, sustained industrial injury to his back, neck, head, both legs, psyche, and bilateral knees, and claimed injury to his neck, both legs, head, psyche, chronic pain, liver, internal, hypertension, and "GERD." Applicant contended he was permanently and totally disabled (100%). “Dr. Miller opined that applicant is 100% disabled, unable to compete in the open labor market, and in need of home health care services. Dr. Brourman deferred the pain issues to Dr. Miller, and incorporated Dr. Miller's assessment of pain issues into his AME reports, including the finding that applicant is in need of home health care services. (Neri Hernandez v. Geneva, (2014) 79 CCC 682 (WCAB en banc) “On this record, it appears that defendant had notice of a request for home health care services in Dr. Miller's October 28, 2014 report (received by SCIF on 11/13/14). When an employer receives notice that "home health care services may be needed or are being provided, an employer has a duty LC 4600 to investigate." (Braewood v. WCAB (Bolton) (1983) 48 CCC 566.) III. DISCUSSION The WCAB continued: “Thus, under these circumstances, defendant has a "duty to investigate the facts in order to determine liability. Defendant was required to take the initiative in providing benefits," and in "making whatever investigation is necessary to determine the extent of [its] obligation and the needs of the employee." “Turning to the medical evidence, our review of the record finds that medical report of Dr. Miller, including his October 28, 2014 report and his March 2, 2016 deposition, constitutes substantial evidence to support applicant's entitlement to home health care services. Dr. Miller conducted an extensive examination of applicant in his office and described applicant's substantial disability. He found applicant permanently and totally disabled, and concluded that his prognosis is "grim." He was consistent in his opinion that applicant is "permanently disabled and will never re-enter the labor market" and requires home health care. Furthermore, Dr. Miller's conclusions are based on specific evidence of applicant's condition and his medical expertise in evaluating the significance of these facts. In Dr. Brourman's September 8, 2014 deposition, he noted the potential need for home health care, which he later confirmed by adopting Dr. Miller's opinions. Dr. Brourman recommended a home care nurse specialist, further discussion with applicant, and further evaluation by Dr. Miller.” California Applicants' Attorneys Association 2019 Winter Convention In his deposition, Dr. Miller agreed that applicant suffered from "failed back syndrome." In his report, he also noted that applicant suffered from "advanced chronic pain syndrome", "major depressive disorder", "post-laminectomy pain syndrome", "narcotic dependency", and "seizure disorder." Dr. Brourman adopted his findings. Dr. Brourman also agreed that applicant needed at least some level of home health care, but that the exact number of hours should be determined by means of a home health care assessment. The WCAB affirmed the WCJ’s determination that applicant was entitled to ongoing home health care services. If you were injured at work and need a workers comp attorney to make sure you are receiving all the benefits you should be receiving or you would like to have a second opinion of your existing worker comp case, please call us at: Give us a call at (855) Burgis-1 We're here to help www.BurgisLaw.com, Reyes v. Northridge – Defendant’s legal obligation to conduct a good faith investigation., Worker's Compensation, 2019
  • What are the legal obligations of Workers’ Compensation insurance carriers? Los Angeles workers compensation Attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of how the workers’ Compensation insurance carriers can be held liable for their unreasonable delay or bad faith towards injured workers during a California work comp case. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of California Workers’ Compensation penalties under Labor Code Section 4650(d); 5814; 5813 and Rule and Regulation 10109. Your work comp insurance company can be held liable if they act in bad faith or purposely cause work comp case delays, watch the full video to be better informed. If you were injured at work and need a workers comp attorney to make sure you are receiving all the benefits you should be receiving or you would like to have a second opinion of your existing worker comp case, please call us at: Give us a call at (855) Burgis-1 We're here to help www.BurgisLaw.com, Workers’ Comp insurance carriers liable for unreasonable delays or bad faith ? Workers Comp Attorney, Worker's Compensation, 2018
  • Exclusive Remedy Rule – Are we really limited to Workers’ Compensation only? Can I file a Civil law suit if my employer failed to have Workers’ Compensation insurance? What is the Uninsured Benefit Trust Fund? Arising Out of Employment / Course of Employment (AOE/COE)? Was I injured during the course of employment ? In this video Los Angeles Work Injury expert Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation, answers to these and many other questions and a brief tutorial on how to navigate the complex legal waters regarding California uninsured employers. UEF ? Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF) ? Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF), AOE/COE (Arising Out of Employment / Course of Employment)? These terms and many others are briefly covered by Attorney Michael Burgis Esq. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and licensed expert to practice employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis will provide you with a FREE consultation to answer any questions you might about the worker's compensation system. If you were injured at work and need a workers comp attorney to make sure you are receiving all the benefits you should be receiving or you would like to have a second opinion of your existing worker comp case, please call us at: Give us a call at (855) Burgis-1 We're here to help ! www.BurgisLaw.com, My employer does not have Workers’ Compensation, what are my rights? What should I do?, Worker's Compensation, 2018
  • Workers' Compensation Supplemental Job Displacement Vouchers In California explained California Workers Compensation attorney and Employment Law Attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of how injured workers can use supplemental job displacement vouchers to pay for vocational rehabilitation school and retrain new skills in order to pursue a new profession. Supplemental job displacement benefits (formerly called “vocational rehabilitation retraining”) come in the form of a voucher that injured workers can use to pay for the costs of school or training in order to gain the skills you need to enter a new profession or line of work. If you sustained an industrial injury you may be entitled to a voucher to be retrained for another job! A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation, employment law expert in the state of California, managing attorney for MB&A Lawyer Michael Burgis provides this summary of Supplemental Job Displacement Vouchers to inform and increase awareness for potentially injured workers and the general public watching this video. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits, Supplemental Job Displacement Vouchers - Workers' Compensation retraining vouchers, Worker's Compensation, 2015
  • Los Angeles workers compensation Attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of the residential home employee exclusion or Labor Code 3352H. A legal certified specialist in Workers’ Compensation and an expert in employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of whether or not a residential worker is considered an employee and whether the home owner is required to obtain workers’ compensation insurance. The Residential home employee exclusion is one of the most heavily litigated Labor Codes. Watch the full video to better understand the implications of Labor code section 3352H. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today ! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and want to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate to maximize your benefits, Are babysitters and workers hired to work on my house my employee - Workers' Comp injury lawyer, Worker's Compensation, 2018
  • An explanation of California Workers' Compensation medical treatment post Senate Bill 863 (2013). How to deal with denied care, denial of medical treatment, what is utilization review, what is Independent Medical Review, Can I appeal the deal? If you were injured at work and need a workers comp attorney to make sure you are receiving all the benefits you should be receiving or you would like to have a second opinion of your existing worker comp case, please call us at: Give us a call at (855) Burgis-1 We're here to help ! www.BurgisLaw.com, How Senate Bill 863 Affects Workers Compensation Medical Treatment-Los Angeles workers comp Attorney, Worker's Compensation, 2016
  • The new era of workers' compensation medical treatment post Senate Bill 863 (2013) allows insurance companies to deny greatly needed medical care through neglect and incompetence. Injured workers' need to elect a great Primary Treating Physician who knows how to properly justify treatment requests (RFAs). Stay informed and get an attorney! If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits Give us a call at 1-(855)-Burgis-1., Workers' Compensation Medical Treatment Requests, Worker's Compensation, 2015
  • California workers compensation attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of compromise and release settlements in work comp accident cases. Compromise and Release also known as C&R settlement is briefly explained on whis video as one of the ways how work comp case can settle. Workers compensation compromise and release settlement future medical is closed, being a lump sum settlement. Specialized in work comp cases, work injuries and employment law in the state of California, Lawyer Michael Burgis provides a brief overview of how a employees sustaining work injuries can settle their workers compensation cases. California Workers' compensation cases can be settled in one of two ways, by Stipulations and Award or by C&R (compromise and release). The difference is that in work comp cases closed by Compromise and Release, generally future medical coverage is closed out, releasing all insurance liabilities on the injured worker's work comp case. Please watch the full video in order to be informed on how a workman's compensation case can close. You need to make sure your workers compensation lawyer works on both settlement options., Compromise & Release Settlement.Work injuries & work accident.Workers compensation lawyer, Worker's Compensation, 2015
  • Los Angeles Attorney Michael Burgis explains what a workers compensation is and what it isn't. A work comp claim is not a lawsuit against your employer and you should not be afraid of being discriminated upon by your employer because you have been injured at work, a workers comp claim is a claim for insurance benefits. Your employer pays a premium every month in case somebody is injured while working for them, the insurance is there to provide medical treatment compensation for permanent disability if you do not have a full recovery and also entitlement for future medical for the rest of your life if you need it. Furthermore, it is illegal to discriminate against you for filing a worker's compensation claim arising from being injured at work, please watch this video, What Is A Workers Compensation Claim? - California injured worker help - Recovery for the injured., Worker's Compensation, 2015
  • California workers compensation and employment law expert, attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of employer duties during workers compensation cases. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits Give us a call at 1-(855)-Burgis-1. We're here to help, and we bring “Recovery to the injured.” For a free consultation, visit: www.BurgisLaw.com, Employers Duties In Workers Compensation Cases, Worker's Compensation, 2015
  • California workers compensation and employment law expert, attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of wage and hour issues in work comp cases. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits Give us a call at 1-(855)-Burgis-1. We're here to help, and we bring “Recovery to the injured.” For a free consultation, visit: www.BurgisLaw.com Call us at (855) 287 4471, Wage And Hour issues In Workers Compensation cases - Recovery for the injured, Worker's Compensation/Employment Law, 2015
  • California workers compensation and employment law expert attorney Michael Burgis provides a brief explanation of how california workers comp cases can settle in work comp cases, specifically stipulation and award settlements. What is an stipulation and award ? What are findings and award. Subscribe to our channel to understand this and many other questions like: How a workers comp case can settle ? What is stipulation and award ? What is compromise and release ? What is future medical award? What are findings and award ? What are Supplemental Job Displacement Vouchers ? Are a qualified injured worker ? You might be be entitled to a 6000.00 voucher towards retraining to learn new skills. Work injuries happen in all jobs and professions, if you need a competent workers' compensation attorney that will fight for your rights, contact us today! A workers compensation lawyer will help you navigate the complex California Worker compensation system. If you were injured and would like to know the law, we offer a FREE CONSULTATION. If you want an experienced workers comp lawyer legal team that will advocate maximizing your benefits Give us a call at 1-(855)-Burgis-1., How california work comp cases settles - Stipulation and Award Settlement In Workers Compensation, Worker's Compensation, 2015
Honors/Awards:
  • Abarca v. Citizens of Humanity, LLC EXPOSING MALICIOUS ILLEGAL TREATMENT OF AN INJURED IMMIGRANT WORKER, Streetfighter of the Year Finalist, Consumer Attorneys of California, 2021
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2019
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2015
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2018
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2017
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2016
  • Top 50 US Verdict in 2017 (#26) Abarca v. Citizen’s for Humanity L.L.C. $650,000 wrongful termination. (Additional attorney fees awarded under F.E.H.A (in addition to the verdict) actually exceed the verdict.) This case was a minimum wage worker who was wrongfully terminated. Defendant never offered any settlement and put on the most aggressive defense I have ever encountered or even heard about. We are set to give oral arguments in the Court of Appeals 5/8/19 to Defend our judgement. There is an Amicus brief filed as well and this case is likely to go to the Supreme Court. In the end, Defendant's bad faith actions will not be rewarded and justice will prevail for Mr. Abarca., Top 50 US Verdicts in 2017, Top Verdicts, 2017
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pa, 2014
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2013
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2012
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2011
  • I have been awarded a "Top attorney" by Pasadena Magazine 2010-2019., Top Attorneys, Pasadena Magazine, 2010
Verdicts/Settlements:
  • $2,500,000 Shane Chicatelli v. Bragg Crane Service (Workers' Compensation 3/2/23), 2023
  • $650,000 Federico Valle v Tru Architectural (Workers' Compensation 10/3/22), 2022
  • $1,600,000 Joseph Williams v Frontier Transportation (Workers' Compensation 11/11/22), 2022
  • $825,000 Christopher Miller v. SUPPRESSIVE PICTURES LLC., AIG CLAIM SERVICES, (Workers' Compensation 1/3/22), 2022
  • $1,999,999.00 Vera Zay v Stuart  Anderson Black Angus (Workers' Compensation 3/28/22), 2022
  • $1,368,452.40 Roberto Rangel v Arrow Staffing (Workers' Compensation 9/21/22), 2022
  • $950,000.00 Guadalupe Guevara v Superior Tank, Inc. (Workers' Compensation 5/24/2022), 2022
  • $850,000 Sean Gray v. Seacall Management (Workers' Compensation 5/25/21), 2021
  • $1,500,000 Francklin Alexander Maradiaga v High View,  Inc. (Workers' Compensation 10/12/2021), 2021
  • $955,067.00 Debra Larsen v Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC (Workers' Compensation 8/13/21), 2021
  • $1,723,936.40 Anastacio Lamas v Allen Construction (Workers' Compensation 3/5/21), 2021
  • $500,000 Artura Alfaro v, MKZ Investments Inc dba Florence Car Wash (Workers Compensation 4/15/21), 2021
  • $500,000 Lisa Johnson v. Makeup Art Cosmetics (Workers' Compensation 1/4/21), 2021
  • $500,000 Herman Smith v. Vons (Workers' compensation 2/25/20), 2020
  • $600,000 John Day v. CMAC Construction Company (Workers' compensation 2/25/20), 2020
  • $875,000 Fabio Gonzalez v. Universal Alloy Corporation (Worker's compensation 3/3/20), 2020
  • $600,000 Brian Kinnamon v. Laminations West (Workers' compensation 2/4/20), 2020
  • $665,583 100% disability award Marlin Olvera v. 24 hour care givers. (Workers' compensation 2/26/20), 2020
  • $528,864 Joaquin Carranza Garcia v. Caldwell Fresh Foods. (Workers' compensation 8/26/19) In ADDITION, there was a 7 figure civil award on top of the WC award/settlement after net credits., 2019
  • $1,800,000 Jaime Esquibel v. F.J. Suraez Trucking (Workers' compensation 11/17/19), 2019
  • $830,663 Trial verdict - Linda Carera/Rosalio Cabrera v. Elite Fuels Transportation. (Workers' compensation 8/7/19), 2019
  • $1,000,000 Blanca Zaragoza v. JC Picciotto (Workers' compensation case 6/25/19), 2019
  • $575,000 Jess Perez v. Wimer Construction Inc. (Workers' compensation claim 5/30/19), 2019
  • $1,200,000 Settlement. Hector Ruiz v. Alhambra Foundry Co. LTD (Workers’ compensation case - 3/27/19), 2019
  • $801,868.97 stipulation (with lifetime future medical care left open). Jaime Esquibel v. F.J Suarez Trucking (Workers’ Compensation case - 1/16/19), 2019
  • $500,000 Alicia Hernandez v. Ralph’s Grocery (Workers’ compensation case – 10/5/18), 2018
  • $500,000 Bertha Arredondo v. Paramount pictures (Workers’ compensation case – 12/26/18), 2018
  • $750,000 Teresa Calderon v. Karen A Westermoe MD (Workers’ compensation case - 7/2/18), 2018
  • $615,456.91 Trial award with lifetime future medical left open. Alicia Hernandez v. Ralph’s Grocery (Workers’ compensation case – 9/4/18), 2018
  • $958,016.65 Trial award with lifetime future medical left open. Bertha Arredondo v. Paramount pictures (Workers’ compensation case – 11/16/17), 2017
  • $500,000 Jorge Arellano v. Jobs Metro Net Inc. (Workers’ compensation case – 5/12/17), 2017
  • Top 50 US Verdict in 2017 (#26) Abarca v. Citizen’s for Humanity L.L.C. $650,000 wrongful termination. (Additional attorney fees awarded under F.E.H.A (in addition to the verdict) actually exceed the verdict.) This case was a minimum wage worker who was wrongfully terminated. Defendant never offered any settlement and put on the most aggressive defense I have ever encountered or even heard about. We are set to give oral arguments in the Court of Appeals 5/8/19 to Defend our judgement. There is an Amicus brief filed as well and this case is likely to go to the Supreme Court. In the end, Defendant's bad faith actions will not be rewarded and justice will prevail for Mr. Abarca., 2017
  • $500,000 Federico Jayme v. Stevens Trucking (Workers’ compensation case – 11/21/16), 2016
  • $2,654,151 Settlement (which includes trial award and post-trial future medical buyout). Ronald Westerman v. American Medical Response (Workers’ compensation case) Note: This was a denied case and the Defendant disputed ALL liability and made no offer prior to trial. I gave oral arguments in the Court of Appeals and reversed a tentative decision against my client (which is unheard of) and Defended all the way to the California Supreme Court., 2014
Pro bono/Community Service:
  • I was Vice President of Los Angeles Valley Applicant Attorney Association which helps educate local attorneys and contribute towards passing better laws to help injured workers., 2017

Office location for Michael Burgis

5900 Sepulveda Blvd
Suite 215
Sherman Oaks, CA 91411

Phone: 888-227-1344

Selections

3 Years Super Lawyers
7 Years Rising Stars
  • Super Lawyers: 2021 - 2023
  • Rising Stars: 2014 - 2020

Top Lists

Up-and-Coming 100: Southern California Rising Stars: 2017, 2020

Certificates and credentials

California Board of Legal Specialization
Workers' Compensation Law
California Board of Legal Specialization logo

Additional sources of information about Michael Burgis

Find me online

Attorney resources for Michael Burgis

Download badge
Update profile
Order online

Contact me

Required fields are marked with an asterisk (*).

To: Michael Burgis Super Lawyers: Potential Client Inquiry

The information contained in this web site is intended to convey general information. It should not be construed as legal advice or opinion. It is not an offer to represent you, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship. The use of the internet or this contact form for communication is not necessarily a secure environment. Contacting a lawyer or law firm email through this service will not create an attorney-client relationship, and information will not necessarily be treated as privileged or confidential.

Your IP address 34.229.131.158 and location have been logged to assist in preventing abuse of this service.

Find top lawyerswith confidence

The Super Lawyers patented selection process is peer influenced and research driven, selecting the top 5% of attorneys to the Super Lawyers lists each year. We know lawyers and make it easy to connect with them.

Page Generated: 0.19327116012573 sec