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. ADJ9 657673, ADJ9 632441, ADJ9 697740, ADJ9 832297, ADJ9 834527, ADJ9 842328, ADJ9 919901, ADJ9 919978
Regular
Apr 14, 2016

KELLY FINN vs. OXNARD SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Kelly Finn's Petition for Reconsideration because it was "skeletal." The petition failed to meet the legal requirements of Labor Code section 5902 and WCAB Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852, which mandate specific details regarding grounds, evidence, and legal principles. The WCAB found the petition lacked specific references to the record and the evidence it relied upon.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for Reconsiderationskeletal petitionLabor Code section 5902WCAB Rulesmaterial evidencespecific references to the recordprinciples of lawdeny or dismissWCJ report
References
3
Case No. ADJ218048 (VNO 0530772) ADJ1017219 (VNO 0373730) ADJ2748924 (VNO 0373487)
Regular
Apr 20, 2018

GILBERT TORRES vs. BEVERLY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL; Permissibly Self-Insured; administered by KEENAN \u0026 ASSOCIATES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by Beverly Community Hospital. The dismissal was based on the petition being "skeletal" and failing to meet the specific pleading requirements outlined in Labor Code section 5902 and WCAB Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852. Specifically, the petition did not detail the grounds for reconsideration, cite the record, or explain how the evidence failed to support the findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalSkeletal PetitionLabor Code § 5902Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10842Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10846Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10852Administrative Law JudgeApplicant
References
7
Case No. ADJ10175718
Regular
Nov 13, 2018

MARJORIE MARLOW vs. AT&T

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed AT&T's Petition for Reconsideration because it was a "skeletal" filing. The petition failed to specifically detail the grounds for reconsideration, cite relevant evidence from the record, or explain how the findings were unsupported. The Board emphasized that petitions must comply with Labor Code section 5902 and Appeals Board Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852. Without these specific details, a petition is subject to dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationSkeletal PetitionLabor Code § 5902Appeals Board RulesRule 10842Rule 10846Rule 10852Specific References to RecordGrounds for ReconsiderationMaterial Evidence
References
6
Case No. ADJ9212812
Regular
Jan 26, 2018

VERN MILLARD vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Vern Millard's Petition for Reconsideration because it was skeletal and lacked specific legal and factual grounds. Although the applicant's attorney attempted to withdraw the petition, the withdrawal request was unsigned. The WCAB cited Labor Code § 5902 and Appeals Board Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852, which require detailed grounds and specific record references. Without proper support, the petition was subject to dismissal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSkeletal PetitionDismissalLabor CodeAppeals Board RulesWCJ ReportVerificationProof of ServiceWithdrawal Request
References
7
Case No. ADJ1862937 (VNO 0503723)
Regular
May 07, 2012

TRAVIS GRANT vs. SIERRACIN CORPORATION (PPG INDUSTRIES), administered by AVIZENT RISK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant sought to revive a December 9, 2008 dismissal order, arguing it was valid under Appeals Board Rule 10852. However, the Board found this dismissal order void *ab initio* because it was issued without the required notice of intention to dismiss and opportunity to be heard, as mandated by CCR Title 8, Section 10582. Therefore, the prior finding that the applicant's claim had not been dismissed was upheld.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinding of FactOrder of DismissalRule 10852Rule 10582Lack of ProsecutionNotice of Intention to DismissVoid Ab InitioAdministrative Law Judge
References
0
Case No. ADJ10285745
Regular
Jun 17, 2019

MELINDA SANCHEZ vs. MERITAGE HEALTHCARE, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Melinda Sanchez's Petition for Reconsideration because it was "skeletal." The petition failed to meet the legal requirements of Labor Code § 5902 and Appeals Board Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852, which mandate specific details on grounds for reconsideration and evidence relied upon. Specifically, the petition did not clearly state the grounds for reconsideration or cite the record with specificity. Consequently, the WCAB found the petition subject to dismissal and would have denied it on the merits had it not been procedurally deficient.

Petition for ReconsiderationSkeletal PetitionLabor Code Section 5902Appeals Board RulesRule 10842Rule 10846Rule 10852SpecificityRecord ReferencesLegal Principles
References
8
Case No. ADJ98 84194
Regular
Apr 13, 2016

JOSE JUAN ESQUIVEL vs. BODEGA LATINA CORP DBA EL SUPER, SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORP

This case involves applicant Jose Juan Esquivel's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation finding. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was "skeletal" and failed to meet specific statutory and regulatory requirements. The petition did not detail the grounds for reconsideration, cite evidence, or clearly state contentions as mandated by Labor Code section 5902 and WCAB Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852. Additionally, the proof of service was defective under Rule 10850, providing a separate basis for dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationSkeletal PetitionLabor Code Section 5902WCAB Rules 10842WCAB Rules 10846WCAB Rules 10852Unsupported EvidenceSpecific ReferencesMaterial EvidenceDefective Proof of Service
References
3
Case No. ADJ2409827 (VNO 0509989)
Regular
Apr 17, 2014

ALICIA EVANS vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of its prior decision concerning Alicia Evans and Southern California Gas Company. While the lien claimant's petition touched upon sanctions, it failed to meet the procedural requirements for reconsideration under Labor Code sections 5902 and 5904, and WCAB Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852. Specifically, the petition lacked detailed grounds, specific record references, and legal arguments, instead presenting a conclusory assertion that the facts mandated a win. Consequently, the Board adopted the judge's report and denied the petition.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5813WCAB Rule 10561bad faithfrivolous conductlien claimantsanctionsLab. Code§ 5902
References
7
Showing 1-8 of 8 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