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. ADJ10887066 ADJ10887074
Regular
Nov 14, 2018

RAUL JUAREZ vs. EB DESIGN, INC., THE HARTFORD INSURANCE

This case concerns defendant's ex parte communication with a QME, specifically sending surveillance video and an advocacy letter without proper notice. The WCAB granted removal, rescinded the trial judge's order striking the QME report, and remanded the case. The Board clarified that WCAB Rule 10507 extends the timeframe for applicant to object to non-medical records, but not the defendant's initial service deadline under Labor Code section 4062.3(b).

RemovalJoint Findings of FactOrder and Opinion on DecisionQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelorthopedic surgerystrickeninadmissibleLabor Code section 4062.3ex parte communication
References
Case No. ADJ6961731 ADJ6959844 ADJ6959868
Regular
Aug 26, 2019

ANTONIO ROMERO vs. MEXICAN AMERICAN OPPORTUINTY FOUNDATION, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS, PMAIC, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This case concerns a timely filed Petition for Reconsideration by the defendant, Imperium Insurance Company, regarding a WCJ's order dismissing liens. The Appeals Board vacated its previous dismissal order, finding the petition was timely under WCAB Rule 10507(a)(2) due to the defendant's out-of-state address. The Board also rescinded the WCJ's findings and returned the matter for further proceedings. The core issue is whether the equitable doctrine of laches applies to lien claimants who failed to file required declarations under Labor Code section 4903.8(d) for pre-2013 liens.

WCAB Rule 10507(a)(2)Petition for Reconsiderationuntimely filingLabor Code section 4903.8(d)lien claimantsdeclarationsSenate Bill 863equitable doctrinelachesWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ710353 (VNO 0479290)
Regular
Jun 04, 2012

DIMAS POSADA vs. PARKWOOD LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The WCAB determined that the petition was submitted 36 days after the Order Dismissing Lien Claim was served, exceeding the statutory 20-day period plus an additional five days for mail service. As a result, the WCAB lacked jurisdiction to review the merits of the lien claimant's arguments. The lien claimant had argued the dismissal was due to a missed hearing caused by a file transfer and timely responded to a notice.

WCABADJ710353VNO 0479290Dimas PosadaParkwood Landscape & MaintenanceEverest National Insurance CompanyBel Air Surgical InstituteExpert Medical ReviewOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimNotice of Intention to Dismiss Lien
References
Case No. ADJ7301665
Regular
Jan 30, 2012

COMELICA HERNANDEZ vs. OPTIMUS EMPLOYER SERVICES, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The applicant sought reconsideration of an order dismissing her workers' compensation case without prejudice. She argued the dismissal was erroneous because she had objected and was now ready to proceed, asserting a due process right to a hearing. However, the Appeals Board dismissed her petition, finding it was filed untimely. The deadline to file a petition for reconsideration from a mailed order is 25 days, and the applicant's filing exceeded this jurisdictional limit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Caseuntimely petitionjurisdictional time limitdue processhearing on the meritsdismissal without prejudicePetition to DismissLab. Code
References
Case No. ADJ4635937 (VNO 0223313) ADJ4329624 (VNO 0237190)
Regular
May 12, 2011

MIGUEL MAZARIEGO, JR. vs. GENERAL REHAB SERVICES, INC.

The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior Findings and Award, disputing the adequacy of temporary disability compensation and reimbursement for self-procured medical treatment. The applicant also claimed the judge erred in not admitting additional evidence and sought sanctions against defense counsel. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed beyond the statutory deadline. While noting the petition was procedurally flawed, the Board stated it would have denied it on its merits if it had been timely. The applicant was also admonished for improperly attaching documents already in evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMiguel MazariegoGeneral Rehab ServicesFindings and Awardindustrial injuriestemporary disabilityself-procured medical treatmentcervical surgerieslumbar surgeriespetition for reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ1032441 (SBR 0338213)
Regular
Sep 30, 2011

MARTIN WILLIAM HALEY, II vs. PENSKE LOGISTICS, OLD REPUBLIC

The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding injury to his left hip and lower back but not to other claimed body parts, and no permanent disability. The applicant's petition for reconsideration was dismissed because it was filed beyond the statutory deadline. Even if timely, the petition would have been denied for failing to specify grounds for reconsideration. The Board emphasized that the time limit for filing a petition for reconsideration is jurisdictional.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ1032441SBR 0338213Penske LogisticsOld RepublicPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Orderindustrial injuryleft hiplower back
References
Case No. ADJ2145098 (SAL 0113144)
Regular
Dec 03, 2012

JOSE R. GONZALEZ-LOPEZ vs. TANIMURA & ANTLE, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a dispute over the duration of temporary disability benefits awarded to the applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration. However, the Board granted the defendant's petition, amending the award to end temporary disability benefits on March 26, 2008, when the Agreed Medical Evaluator declared the applicant permanent and stationary, finding insufficient evidence of continued disability thereafter.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityAgreed Medical EvaluatorPermanent and StationaryUntimely PetitionLabor Code § 5903Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8
References
Case No. ADJ8695118
Regular
Sep 08, 2017

CANDACE\ DAVIS vs. CALIFORNIA COAST GROUP, MARKEL SERVICES

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The petition was dismissed because it was filed after the jurisdictional deadline of July 3, 2017, having been received on July 21, 2017. Furthermore, the petition failed to meet the statutory requirement of being verified, and the lien claimant did not cure this defect after receiving notice. Therefore, the Appeals Board found the petition to be both untimely and unverified, leading to its dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingVerification DefectLien ClaimantWCJ ReportJurisdictional Time LimitDismissal OrderLabor Code Section 5902Cal. Code Regs tit. 8§ 10507
References
Case No. ADJ7722691
Regular
Apr 21, 2014

Tania Bello vs. Barrett Business Services, Inc.

This case involves Blue Shield of California's petition for reconsideration of a WCJ's order dismissing its lien. The lien was dismissed because Blue Shield failed to appear at a Lien Conference, and the WCJ found proper service of the notice. Blue Shield claimed non-receipt of the hearing notice but the WCAB dismissed their petition as untimely. The petition was filed 27 days after the order, exceeding the 25-day jurisdictional limit for filing a petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalLien ConferenceNotice of HearingServiceEAMSUntimely PetitionLabor Code § 5900(a)
References
Case No. ADJ1799392 (AHM 0148162)
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

JOSE BATISTA vs. HUBBELL LIGHTING, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely. The lien claimant filed its petition on February 20, 2013, which was beyond the twenty-day statutory filing deadline after receiving the January 14, 2013 Order. Even accounting for mailing, the petition was late based on the claimant's own stated receipt date. Therefore, the Board upheld the dismissal of the lien claimant's petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien claimantUntimelyDismissedLab. Code§ 5903Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8§ 10507WCJ
References
Showing 1-10 of 149 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