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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ9334766, ADJ319279 (MON 0358792), ADJ3055294 (MON 0361854)
Regular
Jul 17, 2015

TROY WHITETO vs. LONG BEACH TRANSIT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Troy Whiteto's Petition for Reconsideration against Long Beach Transit. The dismissal was based on improper service, as the applicant failed to serve all adverse parties as required by Labor Code section 5905 and WCAB Rule 10510(b). Specifically, the applicant only served one of the defendant's attorneys and did not serve other relevant parties. Consequently, the WCAB found the petition procedurally deficient and ordered its dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalServiceAdverse PartiesAttorney of RecordWCJ ReportLabor Code section 5905WCAB Rule 10510(b)Represented PartyLong Beach Transit
References
Case No. ADJ603568 (MON 0359075)
Regular
Feb 22, 2013

COLEE PITCHFORD vs. TRIMAC TRANSPORTATION, CHARTIS

In Pitchford v. Trimac Transportation, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was primarily based on the petition's failure to comply with Labor Code section 5905, which mandates service on all adverse parties. The WCAB also noted that even if properly served, the petition would have been denied on its merits, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. Finally, the Board clarified that MJR Management Services, Inc. is not a party but an alleged representative, and their representation of a lien claimant lacked proper documentation in the EAMS.

Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5905Adverse partiesService deficiencyWorkers' compensation administrative law judgeReport and RecommendationElectronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMSLien claimantMJR Management Services
References
Case No. ADJ9407205
Regular
Jan 05, 2018

ELLIE KAUCHER vs. PACIFIC OAKS EDUCATION CORP., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's Petition for Removal because no order dismissing their lien had been issued, rendering them not aggrieved. Additionally, the petition was dismissed for failing to include proof of service on an adverse party, which is a statutory requirement. The lien claimant failed to appear at a lien conference, prompting a Notice of Intention to Dismiss, but no actual dismissal order was made. Therefore, the Board found the petition procedurally defective and without merit.

Petition for RemovalLien ClaimantOrder of Dismissing LienWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienProof of ServiceAdverse PartyLabor Code Section 5905Aggrieved PartyLien Conference
References
Case No. ADJ4237598 (LAO 0866879), ADJ2618117 (VNO 0540849)
Regular
Jul 19, 2012

CHRIS JOHN MUNOZ vs. INFINITY METALS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board dismissed Perona Langer's petition for reconsideration because it was a successive petition following a prior dismissal, and it was also untimely filed. The Board noted that Perona Langer failed to serve its initial petition on all adverse parties, leading to the first dismissal. Furthermore, even if the petition were timely and not successive, the Board found Perona Langer's argument for a larger fee share unpersuasive, as the WCJ had reasonably allocated fees based on the results and effort of each prior counsel. The Board affirmed that a party cannot file a second petition for reconsideration after an adverse ruling; they must seek a writ of review in the Court of Appeal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalAttorneys' FeesLabor Code Section 4906(d)Proof of ServiceAdverse PartiesTimelinessWrit of ReviewSuccessive Petition
References
Case No. ADJ2746818
Regular
Dec 16, 2019

GUSTAVO VELA vs. CAFE MIDI. INC, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION ISURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Technology Insurance Company (Petitioner), a non-party, challenging an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) concerning applicant Gustavo Vela. Petitioner sought to set aside the OACR, alleging denial of due process due to an unrelated, subsequent claim involving Petitioner. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition, primarily because it was filed untimely, exceeding the 25-day jurisdictional deadline after Petitioner received the OACR. Furthermore, even if timely, the Petition would have been dismissed for lack of standing as Petitioner was not a party to the original settlement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and Releaseaggrieved personLabor Code section 5900due processcumulative trauma claimadministrative law judgeuntimely petition
References
Case No. ADJ7526420
Regular
Aug 22, 2014

JARRED SHEPPARD vs. SCHLUMBERGER, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration filed by a party. The Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report and has denied reconsideration. The denial is based on the reasoning provided in the WCJ's report, which the Board adopts. Additionally, the Board admonished the lien claimant for failing to serve the petition on all adverse parties as required by statute and regulation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedWCJ ReportLabor Code section 5905WCAB Rules 10505WCAB Rules 10850Lien ClaimantAdverse PartiesService
References
Case No. ADJ6984694, ADJ6984708, ADJ7010763
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

SONIA VARGAS vs. LA COCINA MEXICAN, FIRSTCOMP

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses a Petition for Reconsideration filed by a lien claimant. The primary reason for dismissal is the failure to provide proof of service on all adverse parties, as mandated by statute and board rules. The Board also noted that even if properly served, the petition would have been denied on its merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportProof of ServiceLabor Code Section 5905WCAB Rules 10505WCAB Rules 10850EAMSAdverse PartiesDismissal
References
Case No. ADJ11180704
Regular

RODOLFO MUNIZ vs. AMERICAN SCISSOR LIFT INC.; INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration and Removal. The Board found that removal was not the proper remedy as the order at issue was a final order, making reconsideration the appropriate avenue. Furthermore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed due to the applicant's failure to provide proof of service on the adverse parties.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueProof of ServiceAdverse Parties
References
Case No. ADJ7552310
Regular
Oct 07, 2014

MATTHEW BAKES vs. KAISER PERMANENTE, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses Matthew Bakes' Petition for Reconsideration against Kaiser Permanente. The petition was dismissed as untimely because it was filed more than 25 days after the Findings of Fact were issued. Additionally, the petition was dismissed for being unverified and not properly served on all adverse parties. Therefore, the Board ordered the Petition for Reconsideration dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissalFindings of FactLabor Code Section 5903Code of Civil Procedure Section 1013unverifiednot servedadverse partiesLabor Code Section 5902
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,907 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