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. ADJ861951 (SBR 0325578)
Regular
Sep 26, 2017

MICHELE DOERKSEN vs. VICTOR VALLEY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, ZENITH INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, adopting the reasoning of the WCJ. Additionally, the Board admonished applicant's attorney, S. Roger Kampf, for using offensive, inappropriate, and disrespectful language in the petition, specifically accusations that the judge wrote her opinion as a defense attorney rather than an impartial judge. Mr. Kampf was also admonished for filing a pleading containing false or misleading statements of fact. Failure to comply with Board rules in the future may result in sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeLabor Code § 5813Sanctionable ConductOffensive LanguageMisrepresentation of FactDefenses Attorney AllegationSlanted AnalysisMedical Expert Review
References
0
Case No. ADJ2869065 (LBO 0313061) ADJ3077375 (VNO 0308945) ADJ2422782 (VNO 0299504)
Regular
Jan 05, 2009

LARRY E. MOORE vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY

The WCAB dismissed the applicant’s petition for reconsideration of the WCJ’s order continuing the matter to a status conference, as it was an interim procedural order, not a final order. The WCAB also admonished applicant’s counsel for making misrepresentations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrderFinal OrderLabor Code Section 5900Labor Code Section 5902RemovalLabor Code Section 5310Significant Prejudice
References
12
Case No. ADJ8547905
Regular
Jun 13, 2013

JUANITA MORALES vs. SNAPWARE CORPORATION THE FOOD STORAGE PEOPLE, SEDGWICK

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses a petition for reconsideration filed by lien claimant Empire Radiology. The Board found that there was no appealable order from which reconsideration could be sought. The Board admonished the lien claimant for filing a frivolous petition. Consequently, the petition for reconsideration is dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedFrivolous PetitionLien ClaimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationADJ8547905Snapware CorporationSedgwick
References
0
Case No. ADJ8039055
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

JAMIE WOODS vs. CITY OF SANTA ROSA POLICE DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and rationale for the denial. Applicant's counsel was admonished for citing medical reports not in evidence and for improperly raising issues regarding defendant's post-award conduct.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedWCJ reportApplicant's counselSanctionsAdmonishCiting medical reportsNot in evidenceWCAB Rule 10842(a)
References
3
Case No. ADJ3206096 (MON 0324359)
Regular
Jun 10, 2010

AVIS DRUMMOND vs. UCLA, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Avis Drummond's Petition for Removal, adopting the findings of the administrative law judge. The Board found no grounds to disturb the judge's decision. Additionally, the applicant was admonished for violating WCAB rules by attaching an unauthorized document to her petition.

Petition for RemovalWCAB Rule 10842(c)Denying RemovalAdministrative Law Judge ReportIncorporate ReportAdmonish ApplicantFuture FilingsService Made by MailOfficial Address Record
References
1
Case No. ADJ2569449 (SAC 0356051)
Regular
Aug 23, 2013

EDWARD GIBSON vs. AUTONATION, INC., dba AUTO WEST DODGE, ZURICH/UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS GROUP

This case involved a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the applicant, Edward Gibson. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge. Additionally, defense counsel was admonished for citing a report not in evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedWCJ reportCal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10842WCAB Rules of Practice and ProcedureDefense counselCitation to report not in evidence
References
0
Case No. ADJ6509820, ADJ8911115
Regular
Sep 09, 2013

CHERYL FLETCHER vs. CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, CHEVRON CORP. WORKERS' COMP.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was filed from an interlocutory order, not a final decision. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted. The petitioner was admonished that misrepresenting facts could lead to sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory OrdersRemovalPre-trial OrdersAdministrative Law JudgeReport and Recommendation
References
10
Case No. ADJ7329415
Regular
Jan 14, 2014

DAVID ACUNA vs. AADLEN BROTHERS AUTO WRECKING, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final interlocutory order, not a substantive award or decision. The Board also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant was admonished against filing such impermissible petitions in the future.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
10
Case No. ADJ7505736
Regular
Jan 23, 2017

LADYCARLA PALOMINO vs. CITY OF ANAHEIM

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final, interlocutory order that did not determine substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant's counsel was admonished for filing an inappropriate petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
6
Case No. RDG 0127272
Regular
Jul 16, 2007

ROBERT KWAKE vs. B & C ELECTRIC, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal, finding it skeletal and lacking in allegations of prejudice. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which justified keeping the case at the trial level for further discovery and medical evaluation referrals. The defendant was admonished that further frivolous petitions could result in sanctions.

Petition for RemovalWCJMandatory Settlement ConferenceOff CalendarFurther DiscoveryPanel QMEReport and RecommendationSkeletal PetitionFrivolous PetitionSanctions
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 401 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