CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ6893931
Regular
Jul 01, 2010

JOEL RAMIREZ vs. KUEHNE & NAGEL, INC, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY INSURANCE

The applicant sought reconsideration and removal of a prior Board decision that changed the venue of his workers' compensation case. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as the prior decision was not a final order affecting substantive rights. Furthermore, the Board denied the petition for removal, finding no evidence of irreparable harm or significant prejudice from the venue change. The applicant's argument regarding defendant's alleged violation of WCAB Rule 10410 was deemed irrelevant to the venue change.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCAB Rule 10410VenueAnaheim District OfficeSan Bernardino District OfficeNon-final orderIrreparable harmSignificant prejudice
References
Case No. ADJ7578334
Regular
Sep 27, 2011

ARGELIA MARTINEZ vs. J & R HOCK ENTERPRISES, INC., CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal and changed venue to San Bernardino after the defendant's petition to do so was initially denied. The defendant timely filed a petition to change venue from Long Beach to San Bernardino based on the applicant's residence and injury location. Despite procedural issues with filing, the WCAB determined the petition was timely under Labor Code section 5501.5(c) and WCAB Rule 10410. Therefore, venue was changed to San Bernardino as required by law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition to Change VenueWCAB Rule 10410Labor Code section 5501.5(c)Petition for Removalvenueindustrial injuryfood preparerapplicant's residencelocation of injury
References
Case No. ADJ7128393
Regular
Jun 10, 2010

TOMASA MARTINEZ vs. GUS JR.; FARMER'S INSURANCE COMPANY, Mid-Century Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for removal and dismissed a petition for reconsideration. The defendant sought to change venue from Los Angeles to Riverside, claiming the initial filing was untimely. However, their petition lacked the required verification and statement under penalty of perjury regarding notice receipt, thus failing to establish timeliness under WCAB Rule 10410. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, noting that the defendant could still seek venue change later based on good cause for witness convenience.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADJ7128393PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONPETITION FOR REMOVALCHANGE OF VENUERIVERSIDE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYWCJLABOR CODE SECTION 5501.5WCAB RULE 10410
References
Case No. OAK 0317409
Regular
Feb 08, 2008

CHERRYLLE HATCHETT vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of an order changing venue because the order was not a final determination and the petition was unverified. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion and reversed the venue change, finding the employer's objection to the applicant's chosen venue in Oakland was untimely under Rule 10410. The employer had over two years to object to the Oakland venue after receiving notice of the case number, significantly exceeding the 30-day limit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Changing VenuePetition for ReconsiderationRemovalLabor Code section 5501.5Labor Code section 5900Labor Code section 5902Appeals Board Rule 10410Untimely ObjectionVenue Site
References
Case No. ADJ6624859
Regular

CHRISTIAN ALTAMIRANO vs. CREATIVE MACHINING TECHNOLOGY, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY on behalf of TOWER SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's unverified petition for reconsideration as it sought to appeal a non-final order and was untimely filed. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion, rescinded the prior order denying the change of venue, and returned the case to the trial level. This allows the merits of the defendant's venue change request to be fully addressed.

Venue objectionAdjudication case numberUnverified petitionReconsiderationRemovalOrder Denying Petition for Change of VenueWorkers' compensation judgeActing Presiding WCJTrial levelSubstantive right
References
Case No. ADJ1021405
Regular
Sep 12, 2008

FRANCISCO RAMIREZ vs. SOUTHLAND PIPE CORPORATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The WCAB denied defendant's petition for reconsideration of the Order Denying Change of Venue, finding that the defendant's objection to venue was untimely and waived.

Venue selectionObjection to venueTimeliness of objectionRule 10410Waiver of rightLabor Code section 5501.5(a)(3)Administrative law judgeReconsideration denialMandatory settlement conferenceFinal order
References
Case No. ADJ7641403
Regular
Apr 26, 2011

MARU ARAGAW vs. SAN JOAQUIN GENERAL HOSPITAL, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

Applicant Maru Aragaw sought to remove an order changing venue from San Francisco to Stockton for her workers' compensation claim. The Appeals Board denied the removal petition. The defendant's objection to the initial San Francisco venue was timely, as it was filed within 30 days of receiving notice of the case number and venue. Therefore, the WCJ correctly ordered the venue changed to Stockton, where the applicant resides.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueLabor Code section 5501.6WCJSan Francisco district officeStockton district officeApplication for Adjudication of Claimvenue siteobjection to venueRule 10410
References
Case No. ADJ8682322
Regular
Jun 26, 2013

MARILYN VIELMA vs. BAKERSFIELD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, DIGNITY HEALTH c/o SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant hospital's petition for removal, reversing an earlier denial of their venue change request. The defendant argued their objection to the Marina Del Rey venue was timely filed within 30 days of receiving the adjudication case number and venue notice. The Board found the objection was indeed filed on the 30th day after the defendant's claims administrator received notice. Consequently, venue was changed to the Bakersfield district office, as required by statute when an objection is timely.

Petition for RemovalPetition for Change of Venueuntimelythirtieth dayNotice of ApplicationvenueCNA techindustrial injuryApplication for Adjudication of ClaimLabor Code section 5501.5
References
Case No. ANA 402211
Regular
Apr 14, 2008

CHERYL BUTLER DARBY vs. BARSTOW UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT c/o SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RISK MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, overturning a prior order denying a change of venue. The Board found the defendant's objection to venue was timely filed, based on the applicant's attorney's principal place of business. Consequently, venue was changed to the San Bernardino district office, where the applicant resides and the injury occurred.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueLabor Code section 5501.5(c)WCAB Rule 10410Principal Place of BusinessTimely ObjectionApplicant ResidenceCounty of InjurySan Bernardino District OfficeSanta Ana District Office
References
Case No. ADJ 2662045 (RIV 81817)
Regular
Aug 26, 2008

GUADALUPE ALARCON vs. JOHN BATMAN dba TIRES & WHEELS OF AMERICA, PENNSYLVANIA MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION INSURANCE COMPANY, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The petition for removal is denied because the venue was correctly transferred to the San Diego district office, as there is no district office in Imperial County where the applicant resides and the injury occurred.

Petition for RemovalOrder Changing VenueVenue TransferLabor Code 5501.5Attorney's Principal Place of BusinessConvenience of WitnessesApplication for Adjudication of ClaimDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedExpedited HearingWCAB Rule 10410
References
Showing 1-10 of 26 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational