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. ADJ10044579
Regular
Dec 20, 2017

NEVITA BAILEY vs. FIRST GROUP AMERICA, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant filed a Petition for Removal after the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss due to the applicant's failure to appear at a Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC). The ALJ's notice stipulated dismissal unless the applicant appeared at a rescheduled MSC, which was subsequently taken off calendar due to the removal petition. The Appeals Board denied removal, finding no substantial prejudice as the applicant's failure to appear at the rescheduled MSC was rendered moot by the rescheduling. The Board also noted that a Notice of Intent to Dismiss should not be issued for a *potential* future failure to appear, but rather based on an actual occurrence.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMandatory Settlement ConferenceAdministrative Law JudgeNotice of Intent to DismissWCAB Rule 10563WCAB Rule 10562substantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ11198919 ADJ11199028
Regular
Jul 30, 2019

, Applicant, vs. , Defendants.

This case involves applicant Samuel Gonzalez's petition for reconsideration of orders dismissing his workers' compensation cases due to his non-appearance at a mandatory settlement conference (MSC). The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the dismissal orders. The Board found that applicant's attorney's presence at the MSC satisfied the legal requirement for attendance, as Labor Code section 5700 permits representation by an attorney. Furthermore, the Board emphasized the legal preference for hearings on the merits over default judgments. The matter was returned to the WCJ for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationMandatory Settlement ConferenceWCJOrders Dismissing CaseApplicant's AttorneyProof of ServiceDeclaration of ReadinessNotice of HearingNotice of Intent to DismissLabor Code Section 5700
References
1
Case No. ADJ10243783
Regular
Jan 27, 2017

PEDRO GALARZA SALAZAR vs. HOMEY PET STATION, MID-CENTURY INSURANCE CO., FARMERS INSURANCE CO.

The applicant sought reconsideration of a case dismissed for the applicant's attorney's failure to appear at a priority conference and respond to a Notice of Intent to Dismiss. Although the attorney did not appear at the scheduled time, he did appear later that morning and addressed the WCJ. The Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the dismissal, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found that the WCJ should have treated the applicant's subsequent appearance as an objection and scheduled a hearing, rather than dismissing the case.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CasePriority ConferenceNotice of Intent to DismissFailure to AppearWCJApplicant's AttorneyMinutes of HearingObjection
References
1
Case No. ADJ3609087 (LBO 0392035) ADJ1000696 (LBO 0332475)
Regular
Jul 20, 2017

Katherine Staudt vs. University of California Los Angeles, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involved the dismissal of the applicant's workers' compensation claims by the administrative law judge (WCJ) for failing to personally appear at a mandatory settlement conference. The applicant, represented by counsel who did attend, sought reconsideration, arguing that her attorney's presence satisfied the appearance requirement under Labor Code § 5700. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, finding that while the applicant did not personally appear, her attorney's presence constituted a valid appearance. The WCAB rescinded the dismissal order, emphasizing the legal preference for hearings on the merits over dismissals.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseMandatory Settlement ConferenceApplicant's AppearanceAttorney AppearanceLabor Code Section 5700Section 5404.5Compulsory AppearanceNotice of Intent to Dismiss
References
1
Case No. ADJ7526524
Regular
Nov 15, 2013

LUIS GONZALEZ vs. ONTIC ENGINEERING MANUFACTURING, INSURANCE CO. OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a dismissal order. The applicant's case was dismissed for failure to appear at trial, but the Board found this was an error. An attorney representative for the applicant was present at the trial, satisfying the appearance requirement. Furthermore, the applicant was not required to appear personally unless subpoenaed or given specific notice, which did not occur. The case was rescinded and returned for further proceedings.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseFailure to AppearOut of CountryPrior AttorneyWCAB Rule 10562(a)Hearing RepresentativeHearsay EvidenceMedical Reports
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Shabazz v. State

The claimant's application, specifically a "Notice of Appeal to Perfect," was denied. Cross-motions to dismiss this application were granted without costs. The court cited a lack of subject matter jurisdiction regarding the claimant’s request for money damages as one ground for dismissal. Additionally, it was noted that the claimant did not appear to have filed a timely appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Board decisions. This decision was made with reference to Workers’ Compensation Law § 23.

JurisdictionMoney DamagesTimelinessAppealWorkers' CompensationDismissalNotice of Appeal
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ridgewood Savings Bank v. Houston (In Re Houston)

The debtor, Leonard W. Houston, filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Plaintiff Ridgewood Savings Bank, holding a mortgage on the debtor's home, commenced an adversary proceeding to vacate the automatic stay to facilitate foreclosure. A default judgment was granted against the debtor for failure to appear, which he moved to set aside, citing excusable neglect due to an ankle injury. The case was remanded on appeal for further findings. The court found that while the debtor's failure to appear constituted excusable neglect, he failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense, as he lacked equity in the property and had not made mortgage payments or reimbursed the bank for taxes for an extended period, leading to a lack of adequate protection for the Bank. Consequently, the court denied the debtor's application to set aside the default judgment.

BankruptcyAutomatic StayDefault JudgmentForeclosureExcusable NeglectMeritorious DefenseAdequate ProtectionMortgage LienChapter 13Equity Cushion
References
29
Case No. ADJ1054155 (LAO 0854446) ADJ1247741 (LAO 0854447) ADJ1895803 (LAO 0854448)
Regular
May 03, 2011

HIRITI OKUAMICHAEL vs. PAUL OWENS SHOES INC., STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This amended order clarifies that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the February 8, 2011 Findings and Awards. This reconsideration aims to allow the Board to thoroughly study the factual and legal issues, including those to be raised in the applicant's supplemental petition. The applicant's request to file a supplemental petition has also been granted and reaffirmed. All future communications regarding these cases should be directed to the Office of the Commissioners of the WCAB.

Supplemental PetitionReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10848Findings and AwardsDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersWCABADJ1054155ADJ1247741ADJ1895803
References
0
Case No. ADJ8164012
Regular
Jul 01, 2013

HOSSEIN MOGHADAM vs. TESORO USA PETROLEUM, COMMERCE & INDUSTRY INSURANCE

This case concerns a $\$ 250$ sanction imposed on applicant's attorney for failing to appear at a hearing. The applicant's attorney sought reconsideration, arguing a misunderstanding of "special appearance." The Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's reasoning and clarifying that a "special appearance" does not excuse an attorney from a hearing, especially when made by opposing counsel. The Board emphasized that only a WCJ can excuse an appearance or grant a continuance, and cautioned the attorney against future rule violations.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsFailure to AppearSpecial AppearanceWCJApplicant's AttorneyFiduciary DutiesConflict of InterestContinuanceAppeals Board Rule 10843
References
4
Case No. ADJ9016733
Regular
May 03, 2016

TYSON CONGER vs. CARE AMBULANCE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior award concerning industrial injuries to his low back and psyche. The applicant argues the original findings did not properly weigh evidence and support a higher permanent disability rating. The Board also permitted the applicant to file a supplemental petition to address new information, allowing defendants an opportunity to respond. Reconsideration was granted to ensure a complete review of the record and a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental PetitionEmergency Medical TechnicianLow Back InjuryPsyche InjuryTemporary DisabilityFuture Medical TreatmentPermanent DisabilityApportionment
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 13,623 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