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. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. ADJ8964113
Regular
Jun 24, 2016

LISA LIU vs. ADVENTURER HOTEL, TOWER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claim filed by Tri-County Medical Group for services provided to applicant Lisa Liu. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) dismissed the lien, finding it was filed untimely beyond the 18-month statutory limit. The lien claimant appealed, arguing the filing date of February 2, 2015, was within the period because the 18-month deadline of February 1, 2015, fell on a Sunday, extending the filing to the next business day. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the ALJ's order, and found the lien timely filed. The Board determined that per procedural rules, when the last day falls on a weekend, the deadline extends to the next business day.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4903.5(b)Statute of Limitations18-month periodRules of Practice and ProcedureBusiness DayEAMS RecordJudicial Notice
References
Case No. ADJ11166250
Regular
Aug 18, 2025

Diane Clay vs. County of Los Angeles, Tristar

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Diane Clay against County of Los Angeles and Tristar. The Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report. The primary issue was the timeliness of the petition. According to Labor Code section 5909, the Appeals Board must act on a petition within 60 days of transmission, and a petition must be filed within 25 days of a final decision. The Board found that the petition, filed on June 11, 2025, was more than 25 days after the Findings of Fact and Order issued on May 14, 2025, making it untimely. As untimeliness is a jurisdictional issue, the Board lacked authority to consider it on merits. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissalLabor Code section 5909Appeals Board60-day periodtransmissionEAMSservice of report25-day limit
References
Case No. ADJ2336207
Regular
Jul 25, 2014

GUADALUPE MUNOZ vs. PRONTO MARKET, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a dismissed petition for reconsideration by a lien claimant. The petition was dismissed because it was unverified and not properly served on the defendant. Furthermore, the petition failed to state valid grounds for reconsideration. The Appeals Board also noted that the petition was not brought to their attention within the statutory 60-day period, but due process allowed for the tolling of this period.

Petition for ReconsiderationUnverified petitionService deficiencyIncorrect addressLien claimant60-day statutory periodTollingActual noticeDue processWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ9123534
Regular
Jul 18, 2015

PHILLIP WARD vs. CITY OF FORT BRAGG, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended an award, finding the defendant liable for a 15% increase in permanent disability benefits. This increase is due to the defendant's failure to offer the applicant qualified work within 60 days of his permanent and stationary status, as required by Labor Code section 4658(d)(2). While the applicant had retired, the Board found this did not excuse the employer from making a compliant work offer. The amended order clarifies the increase applies only to payments made 60 days after the Qualified Medical Evaluator's permanent and stationary report.

Labor Code section 4658(d)(2)permanent disability increaseoffer of workmodified workalternative workregular workpermanent and stationary60-day periodretirementCalPERS
References
Case No. ADJ9581008
Regular
Nov 08, 2018

MARIA DEL ROSARIO HERNANDEZ MUNOZ vs. SRH MANAGEMENT INC A CORP. - EL POLLO LOCO, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE, Administered By AMTRUST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision that disallowed a lien claimant's medical-legal expense. The WCAB found that a contested claim existed at the time the services were rendered and that the defendant waived objections by failing to respond within the statutory 60-day period. Consequently, the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine the reasonable cost of the services and potential attorney's fees. A dissenting opinion argued that further development of the record was needed to conclusively establish a contested claim.

WCABMed-LegalSRH ManagementEl Pollo LocoSecurity National InsuranceAmtrustPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJmedical-legal expenses
References
Case No. ADJ2255696 (VNO 0497652)
Regular
May 15, 2009

TATIANA ZAKIANS vs. BLOOMINGDALES

Lien claimant Sam Alaiti, M.D., sought reconsideration of a WCJ's order reducing his lien by over $80\%$. The WCJ recommended granting reconsideration, noting procedural issues with the petition's timely attention by the judge. The Appeals Board found the petition timely filed, but it did not come to their attention until after the statutory reconsideration period had passed. Citing due process principles, the Board held the reconsideration period begins upon their actual notice. Therefore, the Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Reducing LienOrder to Pay Lienworkers' compensation administrative law judgeEAMSFileNetstatutory time periodAppeals Boarddue process
References
Case No. ADJ984305
Significant
Sep 17, 2015

Joann Matute, Applicant vs. Los Angeles Unified School District, defendants

The Appeals Board held that the term 'mailing' in Labor Code section 4610.6(h) is equivalent to 'service by mail', thus extending the 30-day period to file an Independent Medical Review (IMR) appeal by five days under C.C.P. section 1013(a), making the applicant's appeal timely.

IMR determinationservice by mailCode of Civil Procedure 1013(a)Labor Code 4610.6(h)Appeals Board en bancPetition for ReconsiderationUtilization ReviewAdministrative Directoruntimely appeal30-day period
References
Case No. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ10391495
Regular
Jun 20, 2019

EDNA DE LEON, vs. DEPALMA TERRACE SENIOR LIVING; BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES; THE HARTFORD,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Edna De Leon's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The Board noted that California law allows only 25 days to file a petition after a decision is served by mail. De Leon's petition was filed on April 22, 2019, which was more than 25 days after the WCJ's March 25, 2019 decision. The Board emphasized that timely filing is jurisdictional and they lacked authority to consider petitions filed outside this timeframe.

Petition for Reconsiderationuntimelydismissaljurisdictionalservice by mailtime limitWCABWCJdeadline25 days
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,992 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