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. ADJ9667162, ADJ9793109
Regular
Dec 07, 2016

ALMA LOPEZ CASTANEDA vs. FOREVER 21, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted reconsideration, on its own motion, of a prior order denying the applicant's petition for reconsideration in the case of Alma Lopez Castaneda vs. Forever 21. This action is taken to allow for further study of the legal and factual issues involved. All subsequent correspondence and filings related to this reconsideration must be submitted directly to the Appeals Board Commissioners in San Francisco, not to district offices or via e-filing. Trial-level documents unrelated to the petition for reconsideration will continue to be filed through EAMS.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationBoard MotionPetition for ReconsiderationDenying PetitionGranting ReconsiderationLegal IssuesFactual IssuesCommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
Case No. ADJ7549203
Regular
Feb 22, 2018

RONALD WILSON vs. AEROTEK COMMERCIAL STAFFING; As Administered By ESIS CHATSWORTH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's Petition for Removal. The WCAB rescinded the previous order that denied the defendant's motion to set a trial date. The case is now returned to the workers' compensation administrative law judge for further proceedings. This means the previous denial of the trial setting motion is nullified.

Petition for RemovalDecision After RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJrescind ordermotion to set trial datereturn to trial leveladministrative law judgedefendant's motiondenial of motion
References
Case No. ADJ6603030
Regular
Jul 20, 2018

JEFF DEATON vs. SUPERIOR AMERICAN FLEET, U.S. FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB denied the petition, upholding a prior finding that one-on-one sitter services provided by a lien claimant were reasonable and necessary medical treatment. The defendant argued the WCJ erred in disregarding utilization review and a preferred provider organization agreement, but the WCAB found these arguments unpersuasive. The WCAB also noted the defendant waived the issue of a second review of medical bills by failing to raise it earlier.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderWCJlien claimantCare Meridianone-on-one sitter servicesreasonable and necessary medical treatmentpenaltyLabor Code 4603.2
References
Case No. ADJ4305848 (VNO 0500451) ADJ1421355 (VNO 0500448) ADJ3686141 (LAO 0853683) ADJ1772068 (LAO 0853682)
Regular
Oct 01, 2010

ROSA MACIAS vs. GLENRIDGE CENTER, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely filed and not from a final order. The Board also initiated removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to assess sanctions against the lien claimant for failing to appear at trial and filing a procedurally deficient petition. Sanctions are warranted due to the lien claimant's failure to comply with procedural obligations and filing a frivolous petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder of RemovalSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Lien ClaimantNotice of IntentionCompromise and ReleaseBoard Rule 10562Untimely Filing
References
Case No. SFO 0498433
Regular
May 15, 2008

ROGELIO VELASQUEZ vs. HEALTH CERAMICS, LTD., ACCA, INC.

This case concerns the dismissal of a chiropractor's lien for $\$ 12,428.35$ after the lien claimant failed to appear at a mandatory settlement conference. The WCJ dismissed the lien, but the claimant objected, arguing they were unaware of the conference due to an incorrect address on file. Although the WCJ's subsequent attempt to vacate the dismissal was procedurally flawed, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration on its own motion due to the claimant's substantial argument. The Board rescinded the dismissal order and returned the matter to the WCJ for a lien conference to ensure proper resolution.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRogelio VelasquezHealth CeramicsLtd.ACCAInc.SFO 0498433ReconsiderationAppeals Board's MotionWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ9499569
Regular
Sep 11, 2018

CHRIS HENDERSON vs. CDCR - CORCORAN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, increasing the applicant's permanent disability rating from 16% to 26%. This revision was based on incorporating the agreed medical evaluator's findings of a 14% upper extremity impairment due to decreased shoulder range of motion, which the original rating had omitted. The Board also noted the WCJ's rating instructions did not comply with established precedent regarding listing all impairments. The decision otherwise affirmed the WCJ's findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCDCR - Corcoran State PrisonState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationPermanent Disability RatingAgreed Medical EvaluatorOrthopedistEugene HarrisM.D.Temporary Disability Indemnity
References
Case No. ADJ1773429 (MON 0282203) ADJ855226 (MON 0077581) ADJ2715287 (MON 0077582)
Regular
Nov 19, 2013

CURTIS WARD vs. TECHNICOLOR, INC.

This case involves a sanction imposed against applicant's attorney, Leatrice L. Cohen, for violating Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Rules. The Board found Ms. Cohen's attachment of over 300 pages of documents to a petition for removal to be improper, as Board Rule 10842(c) prohibits attaching exhibits. Her defense that some documents were not scanned into EAMS was rejected, as the rule prohibits attaching documents already present in the record. Consequently, the Board ordered Ms. Cohen to pay a $900 sanction to the General Fund.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRemovalSanctionLabor Code section 5813Rules of Practice and ProcedurePetition for removalAppeals Board Rule 10842(c)ExhibitsEAMSFrivolous tactics
References
Case No. MON 0279679
Regular
Jun 26, 2008

EILEEN HALPERN vs. THE HERTZ CORPORATION, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Hertz Corporation's request to reconsider its dismissal of Hertz's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that Hertz's petition was untimely because it was filed with the San Francisco district office, rather than directly with the Appeals Board itself, as required by Rule 10840 for decisions issued by the Board. Even if the petition had been lodged with the district office on the filing deadline, it was not received by the Appeals Board itself within the statutory timeframe.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for reconsiderationUntimely filingWCAB Rule 10840District office filingAppeals Board filingMandatory and jurisdictionalReconsideration on Board motionLabor CodeCode of Civil Procedure
References
Case No. ADJ1773429 (MON 0282203) ADJ855226 (MON 0077581) ADJ2715287 (MON 0077582)
Regular
Oct 10, 2013

CURTIS WARD vs. TECHNICOLOR, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Curtis Ward's second petition for removal, finding his allegations of bias against the Workers' Compensation Judge mirrored a prior denied petition. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions against Ward's attorney. This action is due to the attorney's violation of rules prohibiting the attachment of over 300 pages of documents to the petition, which burdened board resources. The attorney faces a potential sanction of up to $1,000 unless she demonstrates good cause to the contrary.

Petition for RemovalWCJ BiasAppeals Board RulesRule 10842(c)Labor Code 5813SanctionsBad FaithFrivolous TacticsUnnecessary DelayBoard Motion
References
Showing 1-10 of 16,973 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