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. 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. ADJ11124817
Regular
Mar 25, 2019

GASPAR VILLEGAS vs. INTERIOR RESOURCES, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA, INC.

This case involves defendant's petitions challenging an order awarding interpreter costs. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for removal and treated the January 22, 2019 petition as a timely petition for reconsideration, which was granted. The Board also dismissed the February 4, 2019 petition as untimely or moot. The January 7, 2019 order was affirmed, but amended to award $228.00 in Labor Code section 5811 costs.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportsLabor Code 5811 Costsinterpreting costsfinal ordersubstantive rightthreshold issueuntimely petitionmoot petition
References
Case No. ADJ7176475
Regular
Nov 04, 2012

OSCAR ALVARADO vs. BROTHERS TOWING OF NORCO/ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration and granted the defendant's petition. The Board affirmed the original decision but amended Finding of Fact No. 4 to remove the determination that home health care on a trial basis was necessary. This means the applicant's claim for trial home health care was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportAdministrative Law JudgePetition to amend decisionFinding of Facthome health caretrial basisrescinding determinationDefendant's Petition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. LAO 836401
Regular
Jun 26, 2007

GLORIA M. GONZALEZ vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered By HAZELRIGG RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a previous award because it was "skeletal," lacking specific references to the record and legal principles. Furthermore, the applicant's amended petition was filed seven days after the statutory deadline, and supplemental petitions require prior Board approval, which was not obtained. The Board concluded that the amended petition would not be considered, even as a supplemental filing, as it appeared to be an attempt to extend the filing period.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJindustrial injurypermanent disabilityapportionmentmedical treatmentLC 4061/4062P&S
References
Case No. ADJ 1153404
Regular
Sep 04, 2008

Barbara Clark vs. SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM

Applicant's petition for reconsideration is dismissed as untimely. Reconsideration is granted for Dr. Tepper's petition, with his deposition fee set at $250/hour, allowing him to contest the fee afterward under Labor Code section 5307.6(c).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationDismissing ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code section 5903(b)FraudDiscovery Orders
References
Case No. ADJ559742 (LAO 0886579) ADJ2524675 (LAO 0886580)
Regular
Oct 18, 2010

Maureen Simmons vs. TELEPACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS, HARTFORD WORK COMP PROGRAM, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's August 19, 2010 Findings and Orders denying benefits. However, the Board granted reconsideration on its own motion due to the applicant's inability to attend trial approximately 400 miles from her home and her claim that her attorney failed to inform the court. The Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the matter for further proceedings, also noting the applicant's request for a change of venue due to hardship.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTelepacific CommunicationsHartford Work Comp ProgramGallagher Bassett ServicesPetition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionGranting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ4599548 (MON 0212034)
Regular
Mar 25, 2014

KRISTIAN VON RITZHOFF vs. OGDEN ENTERTAINMENT FOOD SERVICES, AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC., BROADSPIRE

This case involves applicant Kristian Von Ritzhoff's petition for reconsideration of a prior Board decision. The Board had previously modified an administrative law judge's order, shifting the responsibility for paying a sanction and costs from the defendant to the applicant. The applicant's current petition sought reconsideration of this modified order, but the Board found it was a successive petition without a new grievance. Because the applicant was not "aggrieved" by the modification to the payment method and had not been granted relief previously sought, the Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionOpinion and OrderGranting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderWorkers' compensation administrative law judgeSanction and costsLabor Code section 5900
References
Case No. ADJ17464637
Regular
Oct 28, 2025

Alisher Suliemanov vs. Pizza Hut, Pizza Hut, Southern California Pizza Co., Athens Administrators

The case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the defendant after an Order Approving a Compromise and Release (OACR) was executed and later amended by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The WCJ rescinded the original OACR and issued an amended one within the 15-day period allowed by WCAB Rule 10961(c). Consequently, the Appeals Board determined that no further action was necessary on the Petition for Reconsideration because the disputed order no longer existed. Despite the WCJ preparing a Report and Recommendation, the Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as moot.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseRescinded OrderAmended OrderJurisdictionWCJ ReportWithdrawal RequestMoot PetitionWCAB Rule 10961
References
Case No. ADJ14244909
Regular
Apr 25, 2025

YONGQUAN HU vs. AMERICAN ALLIANCE LOGISTICS, INC., LIANG YE, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

Applicant Yongquan Hu and defendant Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF) both petitioned for reconsideration of an Amended Findings and Award. The WCJ's initial decision found an industrial injury resulting in permanent total disability and calculated average weekly earnings based on multiple employers. Applicant disputed the wage calculation method, while UEBTF identified an inadvertently omitted week of wages. The Appeals Board granted both petitions, adopting the WCJ's report and amending the decision to reflect corrected average weekly earnings of $1,462.15, leading to a temporary and permanent total disability rate of $974.77 per week.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardYongquan HuAmerican Alliance LogisticsInc.Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundAdjudication NumberVan Nuys District OfficeOpinion and OrderGranting Petitions for ReconsiderationDecision After Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ2637562 (AHM 0384910) ADJ3615654 (AHM 0384911)
Regular
Jul 01, 2011

ABENAA APPAUH vs. ARROWHEAD REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Abenaa Appauh's Petitions for Removal seeking to overturn an order quashing a subpoena duces tecum. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report, which found the petitions lacked merit and failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The judge noted that a petition for reconsideration would be an adequate remedy after a final decision. Additionally, the petitions were deemed defective due to a lack of proper verification.

Petitions for RemovalOrder DenyingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubpoena Duces TecumQuashing SubpoenaLabor Code §5310WCJVerified PetitionAmended PetitionDeclaration
References
Showing 1-10 of 16,655 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