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. ADJ5807181, ADJ9508374, ADJ7425454
Regular
Dec 15, 2014

BELINDA BUTLER vs. MAIN EVENT LIMOUSINES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT, PACIFIC CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed this petition because it was filed from an interlocutory order granting reconsideration, not a final order or decision. Under Labor Code section 5900, reconsideration can only be sought from final orders. The Board cited numerous authorities establishing that an order granting reconsideration without resolving issues is not final. Therefore, the petition was procedurally improper and dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory Procedural OrdersGranting ReconsiderationDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLab. Code§ 5900Cal CEBGumilla v. Industrial Acc. Com.
References
Case No. ADJ216783
Regular
Aug 09, 2013

DENNIS BATES vs. SEROLOGICALS CORPORATION, UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration. The petition was filed against an order granting reconsideration, which is considered an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision. California Labor Code Section 5900 requires reconsideration petitions to follow a final order. Therefore, the Board dismissed the petition as it was improperly filed.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory Procedural OrderGranting ReconsiderationDismissedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLab. Code § 5900Safeway StoresDufaultOrtiz
References
Case No. ADJ2912733 (VNO 0470821)
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

PAMELA WARD vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Pamela Ward's petition for reconsideration. This dismissal was not based on the merits of her petition, but rather on the procedural issue that a petition for reconsideration can only be filed after a final order. The WCAB's prior order granting reconsideration was found not to be a final order under Labor Code § 5900. Therefore, Ward's petition was procedurally defective and consequently dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderLabor Code § 5900Gumilla v. Industrial Acc. Com.Safeway Stores v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Dufault v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Ortiz v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.City of Los Angeles v. Industrial Acc. Com.Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ8098352
Regular
Jan 06, 2016

LIN JI vs. JI RONG RESTAURANT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a notice of intention to dismiss liens. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was not taken from a final order, decision, or award, as required by Labor Code $\S 5900(a)$. The court adopted the WCJ's report and recommendation, finding the notice of intention did not determine any substantive right or liability. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was dismissed.

WCABLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalNotice of IntentionLien ConferenceWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationFinal OrderLabor Code § 5900
References
Case No. SAL 112739
Regular
Mar 04, 2008

DANIEL DUARTE vs. GENERAL VINEYARDS/MCFARLAND & SONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision, as required by Labor Code § 5900(a). The order in question allowed an applicant's QME report and reopened the record for a supplemental report, neither of which determined substantive liability. Even if treated as a petition for removal, it was denied on the merits for failing to show significant prejudice or irreparable harm.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJQME reportDr. KneaplerAOE/COELabor Code § 5900
References
Case No. ADJ2104768 (FRE 0220936)
Regular
Jun 01, 2009

MARTIN PORRAS vs. H&F FARMS, IGNACIO & DELFINA CUEVAS, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE CO., GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

California Indemnity Insurance Company sought reconsideration and removal of a WCJ's denial of its motion to dismiss. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the order denying dismissal is not a final order subject to review under Labor Code § 5900. The petition for removal was denied as California Indemnity failed to demonstrate requisite prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be inadequate. The prior order approving a Compromise and Release was already rescinded and returned for further proceedings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise & Releaserescindedinterim orderfinal orderLabor Code § 5900
References
Case No. ADJ8689422
Regular
Sep 06, 2013

ALVARO GRAMAJO vs. CAIN'S TIRE, INC., UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a final order, as Labor Code § 5900 only permits reconsideration of final decisions. The WCAB denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no demonstration of irreparable harm from a discovery order requiring witness statement production prior to the applicant's deposition. Finally, the WCAB corrected a clerical error in the original award to accurately reflect that the applicant *claims* to have sustained an industrial injury, rather than definitively finding such an injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryTire InstallerBack InjuryWitness StatementsDepositionDiscovery Order
References
Case No. OXN 0131575
Regular
Jun 16, 2008

NIGERIA BUTLER vs. VORTECH ENGINEERING, MAJESTIC INSURANCE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Nigeria Butler's petition for reconsideration. The Board found the WCJ's order, which directed liens to be "paid, adjusted or litigated," was not a final order. Because the order did not resolve substantive rights and liabilities, it was not subject to reconsideration under Labor Code section 5900.

Petition for ReconsiderationInterlocutory ordersFinal orderSubstantive rightsLiabilitiesAdjustment of amountsWCJ orderDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 5900
References
Case No. ADJ6715627
Regular
Jul 11, 1914

ELGA PEREZ vs. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES-IN HOME SUPPORT SERVICES, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Elga Perez's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a Notice of Intention to Dismiss, not a final order disposing of substantive rights. Such a procedural notice is not considered a final order eligible for reconsideration under Labor Code section 5900. Additionally, the petition lacked the statutorily required verification. Therefore, the Board dismissed the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DismissFinal OrderInterlocutory Procedural OrdersSubstantive RightsLiabilitiesLabor Code Section 5900Labor Code Section 5902VerificationDismissal
References
Case No. ADJ1332416 (WCK 0031685), ADJ3521523 (WCK 0322592), ADJ4017994 (WCK 0029276)
Regular
May 16, 2014

PAMELA ZEILSTRA vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Pamela Zeilstra against Target Stores and Sedgwick CMS. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was untimely and not filed from a final order, as required by Labor Code section 5900. The Board clarified that interlocutory procedural orders, which do not determine substantive rights, are not subject to reconsideration. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiability DeterminationWCABWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and Recommendation
References
Showing 1-10 of 366 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