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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brewster v. First Trust & Deposit Co.

The court denied applications for a stay and to dismiss an appeal. The memorandum clarifies that the filing of a bond did not trigger an automatic stay under sections 594 and 615 of the Civil Practice Act. The court reasoned that the order appealed from was not solely for the payment of money as defined by section 594, and the appellants' bond was not a statutory bond because the order concerned payments by the First Trust & Deposit Company, not the appellants. The court also noted that it had previously, in its discretion, denied a stay, and it adhered to that decision.

Stay applicationAppeal dismissalAutomatic stayCivil Practice ActBondStatutory bondPayment orderDiscretionary stayAppellate procedure
References
1
Case No. ADJ3213121 (LBO 0361407)
Regular
Aug 30, 2010

GLENDA M. BRUCE vs. COMPTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

The Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, reversing a prior order that quashed the applicant's deposition. The applicant amended her claim to include hair loss and a fall after her last deposition. The Board found good cause for an additional deposition, as the defendant did not have notice of these new claims prior to the previous depositions. Therefore, the applicant is required to submit to a fifth deposition specifically addressing the hair loss and fall allegations.

Petition for RemovalQuashed DepositionCompensable ConsequencesAmended ApplicationIndustrial InjuryHair LossFallPrior NoticeFifth DepositionRescinded Order
References
0
Case No. ADJ6661819
Regular
Oct 24, 2014

ALVIN WALLS vs. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL CENTRAL CALIFORNIA, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration. However, the WCAB granted reconsideration on its own motion and rescinded the prior decision. The applicant claims three permanent disability checks were forged and that he never received them, but the WCAB found the applicant's initial proof insufficient. The case is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings, including obtaining expert testimony on handwriting and potential electronic deposit issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPermanent Disability ChecksForgeryHandwriting ExpertUniform Commercial CodeBurden of ProofPrima Facie ShowingElectronic DepositFelony Prosecution
References
2
Case No. ADJ7046175
Regular
Jun 07, 2013

, DAVID WILKIE, vs. , CHATEAU HOTEL, and FIRSTCOMP OMAHA for SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY,

This case involves an applicant's petition for removal to the Appeals Board, challenging a WCJ's denial of his petition to quash depositions. The applicant argued improper notice and service of deposition subpoenas, but the WCJ admitted the depositions solely for the purpose of determining timely notice, not for substantive evidence. The Appeals Board denied the removal petition because the applicant had not yet suffered prejudice or irreparable harm, as the depositions had not been used for substantive purposes and he could raise objections later if aggrieved.

Petition for RemovalQuash DepositionsCode of Civil ProcedureCCP section 2025.270Proper NoticeProof of ServiceIndustrial InjuryLeft Upper ExtremityFindings and OrderWCAB Rule 10843
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of D'Addio v. Peter Annis, Inc.

A widow filed a claim for workers' compensation death benefits after her husband, who had an established claim for asbestosis, died. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found a work-related death and ordered the employer's carrier to deposit funds into the aggregate trust fund (ATF) in July 2010. The carrier did not appeal this initial decision. After a subsequent WCLJ decision in December 2010 reiterated the ATF deposit, the carrier sought review, arguing the deposit was unwarranted. The Workers' Compensation Board denied the carrier's application as untimely. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the 30-day appeal period for the July 2010 decision had expired and the later WCLJ decision did not extend that timeframe. The court found no abuse of discretion by the Board.

Workers' CompensationUntimely ApplicationAggregate Trust FundDeath BenefitsAsbestosisOccupational DiseaseAppellate ReviewBoard DiscretionTimelinessAppeal Denial
References
5
Case No. ADJ9837582, ADJ9835957
Regular
Jul 09, 2015

SANTOS GUZMAN vs. MAIN IMPERIAL, LLC, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves Applicant's petition for removal of a WCJ's Order to Compel attendance at a deposition. The Board denied removal, finding Applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Order to Compel was properly obtained via a walk-through procedure, not an improper ex parte communication. Furthermore, Applicant provided no valid reason for objecting to the continued deposition, especially after prior agreement and the alleged factual inaccuracy of his objection regarding deposition transcripts.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalOrder to Compel AttendanceDepositionAdministrative Law JudgeWCJCumulative Trauma InjurySpecific InjuryDue ProcessEx Parte
References
2
Case No. ADJ9016407
Regular
Sep 18, 2014

MARIA VALADEZ vs. BUDGET JANITORIAL, HARTFORD INSURANCE, CANNON COCHRAN SCOTTSDALE

The defendant sought to depose the applicant's attorney, alleging crucial information regarding the applicant's alleged industrial injuries was obtainable only through this deposition. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal, upholding the WCJ's protective order. The Board found the defendant failed to demonstrate the attorney's deposition was crucial, as applicant's deposition and access to medical records already provided sufficient means to defend the claim. The defendant's petition was therefore denied.

Petition for RemovalProtective OrderDeposition of AttorneyDiscovery DisputesIrreparable HarmAttorney-Client PrivilegeCarehouse Convalescent HospitalIndustrial InjuriesMedical RecordsEmployer Witnesses
References
0
Case No. ADJ11240744
Regular
Jan 16, 2019

CODY BACA vs. JOHN MUIR HEALTH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for removal of an order allowing a second deposition. The applicant argued prejudice due to potential questions about an unrelated criminal matter and a hold on medical discovery. The Board found no evidence of irreparable harm or substantial prejudice, as the applicant could object to inappropriate questions during the deposition. The Board also noted that an evidentiary hearing on the deposition issue had already occurred and that medical discovery was only postponed, not indefinitely halted.

Petition for RemovalSecond DepositionUnrelated Criminal MatterFifth AmendmentPrejudiceIrreparable HarmEvidentiary HearingMedical DiscoveryPQME EvaluationDeclaration of Readiness
References
0
Case No. ADJ2963614 (MON 0259813) ADJ3035378 (MON 0259810)
Regular
Nov 28, 2016

LOLITA DOLLIOLE vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior order. The prior order denied the applicant's request to compel the defendant to re-schedule a deposition of Dr. Iqbal Anwar. Although the defendant had previously agreed to re-schedule the deposition, they later determined it was no longer necessary. The Board found that the applicant could notice the deposition herself and had not shown sufficient prejudice or irreparable harm to warrant judicial intervention. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactPetition to CompelDepositionDr. Iqbal AnwarStipulationReport and RecommendationFinal OrderInterlocutory Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ10832179
Regular
Jun 08, 2018

ELIZABETH OLIVAS MONTOYA vs. SADDLEBACK VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of an order compelling her deposition. However, the Board granted the petition for removal, rescinded the deposition order, and returned the matter to the trial level. This decision was based on the applicant's inability to drive due to injury and subsequent complications with her attorney's health, coupled with the procedural issue of not allowing the applicant an opportunity to be heard before the order was issued. The Board hopes the parties can resolve the deposition dispute amicably at the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Compelling Attendance at DepositionWCJCumulative TraumaInstructional AssistantPetition to Compel DepositionOpportunity to be heardKnee Injury
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 13,255 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