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. ADJ10607341
Regular
Apr 03, 2025

ANGIE JAUREGUI vs. CITY OF HOPE NATIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, PERMISSIBLY SELF-INSURED, administered by ADMINSURE, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal filed by the defendant, City of Hope National Medical Center. The Board emphasized that removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only when substantial prejudice or irreparable harm is proven, or when reconsideration is an inadequate remedy. In this case, the Board found that the defendant failed to demonstrate such harm, and issues related to discovery had already been preserved for trial. Additionally, the Board admonished the defendant's attorneys for attaching over one hundred pages of exhibits to the petition, noting that such a practice, amounting to a request for judgment on the pleadings, is not permitted in workers' compensation matters.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyDiscoveryPre-trial Conference StatementDue ProcessJudgment on the Pleadings
References
Case No. ADJ1611115 (STK 0117929)
Regular
Jul 25, 2016

THERESA POLLEX vs. CRESTWOOD HOSPITAL, FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was taken from a non-final, interlocutory procedural order. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm that would necessitate this extraordinary remedy. The WCJ's report, which the Board adopted, adequately addressed the issues, and reconsideration remains an adequate remedy should a final adverse decision issue later. Therefore, the Board ordered the dismissal of reconsideration and denial of removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutoryProcedural DecisionEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ15203597; ADJ15203084; ADJ15203598
Regular
Aug 04, 2025

FRANCISCO AGUIRRE vs. CALIFORNIA DRYWALL CO.; THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered a Petition for Removal. The Board denied the petition, stating that removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely granted. The petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor did they show that reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy. Therefore, the Board concluded that the petition should be denied.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyWCJ ReportAppeals BoardCalifornia Drywall Co.The Hartford
References
Case No. ADJ9589089
Regular
Sep 28, 2018

Ellen Deubner vs. Wellpoint, Zurich North America

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Ellen Deubner's Petition for Removal. Removal is an extraordinary remedy that requires a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board found that Deubner failed to demonstrate either, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse decision is ultimately issued. Therefore, the petition for removal was denied.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationadequate remedyextraordinary remedydenial of removalcase ADJ9589089
References
Case No. ADJ11043173
Regular
Sep 13, 2018

Samuel McKee vs. Cal Fire Neu Unit, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Samuel McKee's Petition for Removal in case ADJ11043173. Removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring proof of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which McKee failed to establish. The WCAB found that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse decision occurs later. Therefore, the petition was denied.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationadequate remedyCal FIREState Compensation Insurance FundADJ11043173
References
Case No. ADJ10321666
Regular
Jan 30, 2018

ASCENCION ROBLES vs. L&S FRAMING, INC., BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a Petition for Removal in this case. Removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which was not met by the petitioner. The WCAB found that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse decision were ultimately issued. Therefore, the petition was denied based on the WCJ's analysis of the arguments.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationadequate remedydenial of removalextraordinary remedyADJ10321666
References
Case No. ADJ12795046
Regular
Mar 04, 2025

VICENTE SIXTO vs. LANGE TWINS, INC.; ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal filed by the petitioner. The Board emphasized that removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely granted, requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy. Based on the Workers' Compensation Judge's analysis, the Board was not persuaded that these criteria were met, thus upholding the denial.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationadequate remedyextraordinary remedyADJ12795046Lange Twins
References
Case No. ADJ10586958
Regular

INOCENTA PALENCIA vs. NESTLE PREPARED FOODS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns Inocenta Palencia's workers' compensation claim against Nestle. Palencia filed a Petition for Removal, an extraordinary remedy. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, finding Palencia failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board also determined that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy should an adverse decision be made later.

Petition for RemovalDeniedAppeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationadequate remedyextraordinary remedyCortez
References
Case No. ADJ10994100
Regular
Aug 20, 2018

ROSABETH DORFHUBER vs. MICHAEL\'S STORES, GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Rosabeth Dorfhuber's Petition for Removal. The Board stated that removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which was not demonstrated here. Furthermore, the Board found that reconsideration will be an adequate remedy should an adverse decision be issued later. The WCJ's analysis of the petitioner's arguments supported the denial.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boardextraordinary remedysubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationadequate remedyWCJ reportapplicantdefendants
References
Case No. ADJ14429786
Regular
Jun 02, 2025

JOSE ZACARIAS GONZALEZ vs. WEST CENTRAL, LLC; THE HARTFORD; WEST CENTRAL PRODUCE SERVICES, INC.; INVO PEO INC.; III LCF WCP SERVICES INC.; UNITED WISCONSIN INS. CO. administered by NEXT LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, concurring with the WCJ's analysis. The Board found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was denied, nor did they show that reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy. The decision highlighted that removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. Therefore, based on the record, the petition was denied.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportAdjudication NumberVan Nuys District Office
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,687 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