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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ 7941996
Regular
Apr 26, 2016

ROBERTO ALVAREZ vs. LINK STAFFING, INC., ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a disputed lien dismissal where the lien claimant's representative allegedly falsified hearing minutes to obtain the rescission of a dismissal order. The Appeals Board dismissed the employer's petition for reconsideration because the rescission order was not a final decision. However, the Board granted removal due to serious allegations of misconduct, remanding the case to the WCJ for an evidentiary hearing on whether the representative appeared, tampered with records, or made false statements. The WCJ is also tasked with making findings and recommendations on potential sanctions under Labor Code section 5813.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLien DismissalPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalMinutes of HearingFraudMisconductSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813
References
Case No. VNO 0509254
Regular
Apr 17, 2008

CAROL LEVENSON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a claim for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus allegedly caused by noise exposure during firearms training. The Appeals Board found the opinion of the Agreed Medical Evaluator, Dr. Grossan, to be substantial evidence, concluding that the applicant's conditions were not work-related. Consequently, the Board denied the applicant's claim for hearing loss and tinnitus, awarding only reimbursement for medical-legal liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalTemporary DisabilityFindings and AwardLicensing Program AnalystBilateral Hearing LossFirearms TrainingShooting RangeTinnitusQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)
References
Case No. ADJ16783938; ADJ16778187
Regular
Aug 28, 2025

Polly Mark Dizon vs. Spears Manufacturing Company, Zurich San Francisco

Applicant Polly Mark Dizon filed applications for cumulative and specific injuries. The Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) issued a Findings and Order (F&O) requiring additional Qualified Medical Examination (QME) panels, which the defendant opposed. Defendant filed a Petition for Removal, arguing they would suffer substantial prejudice. The Appeals Board granted the Petition for Removal, finding that due process was violated as no evidentiary record was made, and the Minutes of Hearing were unclear. Consequently, the May 24, 2024 F&O was rescinded, and the matter returned to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with the Board's opinion.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Examinationsubstantial prejudiceMinutes of HearingOrdered Off CalendarFindings and OrderHearing LossHeadachesNeurologyAudiology
References
Case No. ADJ1197547
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

RAMON LARIOS vs. STAFFMARK INC. WEST, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION FOR ATLANTIC INSURANCE COMPANY in liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order dismissing N-Care's lien claim. N-Care failed to pay the required $100 lien activation fee before their lien conference, and a stipulation was entered acknowledging this failure. While N-Care paid the fee shortly after the order of dismissal was issued, the Board found this was not timely compliance with the regulation requiring payment prior to the lien conference or at its commencement. The Board adopted the judge's reasoning that payment "at" the hearing meant at the time the hearing commenced, not at some later point during the same day.

Lien activation feeDWC emergency regulation 10208(a)Labor Code section 4903(b)Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienDeclaration of Readiness to Proceedlien conferenceworkers' compensation administrative law judgeEAMS systemdisposition
References
Case No. ADJ6939769
Regular
Sep 28, 2010

RONY BONILLA vs. AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, rescinding the prior Findings and Award. The Board found the original decision void *ab initio* due to the Administrative Law Judge's failure to serve the Minutes of Hearing and Summary of Evidence and issue a Notice of Intent to Submit. This procedural defect deprived the defendant of due process and the opportunity to object. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardMinutes of HearingSummary of EvidenceLabor Code section 5313Board Rule 10562(a)(2)Notice of Intent to SubmitDue ProcessExpedited Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ7172643; ADJ7172641
Regular
Apr 02, 2012

JUSTIN MILLER vs. PF CHANGS CHINA BISTRO, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves an applicant whose workers' compensation claims were dismissed by the WCJ for lack of activity and prosecution. The applicant sought reconsideration, arguing due process violations and non-compliance with dismissal procedures. The Appeals Board denied the petition, finding the applicant's objections vague and lacking specific reasons for the lack of prosecution despite ample opportunity. A dissenting opinion argued that the dismissal constituted an abuse of discretion as the applicant had indicated an intention to prosecute the claim.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Order Dismissing Applicationswithout prejudicePetition for Dismissallack of activity and prosecutionNotice of Intent to Dismiss Applicationsobjections overruleddue process rights violatedCalifornia Code of Regulations title 8 section 10582
References
Case No. ADJ8188717
Regular
Mar 18, 2019

DANIEL CANO vs. A FRAME, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

Lien claimants Majzel and Premium seek reconsideration after their 2012 and 2016 liens were dismissed for failure to pay activation fees and potentially being untimely. While the Board affirms dismissal of the 2012 liens, they grant reconsideration to amend the findings. The timeliness of the 2016 liens is now deferred, ensuring due process and a fair hearing before any final determination is made.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and DecisionNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsWCJActivation FeeDismissed by Operation of LawCode of Civil Procedure Section 473(b)Mistake and Inadvertence
References
Case No. ADJ7073090
Regular
Mar 12, 2018

LUCIA HERRERA vs. COMFORT INN, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a prior order dismissing a hospital's lien. The lien claimant argued its error in filing a new lien and paying a filing fee instead of an activation fee was excusable neglect. The Board found the claimant was not afforded due process by being denied a hearing on this issue and that the original decision was prematurely issued before trial briefs were due. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision on the lien claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantReconsiderationDismissal by operation of lawActivation feeFiling feeExcusable neglectDue processFair hearingLabor Code Section 4903.06
References
Case No. ADJ8182648
Regular
Oct 23, 2013

MARIO CRUZ vs. EL CHOLO CANTINA; COMP WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by lien claimant ProEx Diagnostics, represented by Centric Medical Management Corp. The petition was dismissed because it was not filed timely, as it was received by the Board after the statutory deadline. Even if the petition had been timely, it would have been denied on its merits for failing to appear at a scheduled lien trial and for not providing sufficient justification for its non-appearance. The Board noted the lien claimant also failed to provide proof of an activation fee payment at a prior hearing.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationTimely-filedReport and RecommendationAdministrative Law JudgeDismissalLien ClaimNon-appearanceOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseDeclaration of Readiness
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,011 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