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. ADJ3505091 (OXN 0144958) ADJ1732342 (OXN 0144957) ADJ6575424
Regular
Dec 22, 2014

JOSEFINA LOPEZ vs. RAMCO ENTERPRISES, REDWOOD FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY c/o BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Ramco Enterprises' petition for reconsideration of a stipulated award. Ramco sought to overturn the award based on an alleged mutual mistake in calculating the permanent disability rate, attempting to invoke Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b). However, the Board found that CCP 473(b) is not binding in workers' compensation proceedings and that even if considered, the alleged mistake did not constitute sufficient grounds to set aside the jointly prepared and approved stipulated award. The Board emphasized that a unilateral mistake or a change of mind is insufficient to rescind an award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportCode of Civil Procedure section 473(b)Stipulated Awardmutual mistakejoint Stipulations with Request for Awardgood causeinadequate settlementunilateral mistake
References
5
Case No. ADJ4700514 (RDG 0104247) ADJ3038015 (RDG 0121741)
Regular
Nov 10, 2008

MICHELLE TOMEI vs. GENUINE PARTS, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed two days after the statutory deadline. The deadline for filing was September 8, 2008, but the petition was not received by the Board until September 10, 2008. The Board lacked jurisdiction to consider an untimely petition, even with consideration of CCP § 473.

CommutationPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor CodeCode of Civil ProcedureTimelinessJurisdictionalOrder of CommutationOpinion on Decision
References
4
Case No. ADJ9188065
Regular
Dec 09, 2016

CESAR SALAZAR vs. GARMENT LINE, INC., OAK RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration in a case involving an applicant and defendants Garment Line, Inc. and Oak River Insurance Company. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that the lien claimant failed to appear at a lien trial and did not demonstrate good cause for their absence or a basis for relief under CCP 473. The Board also noted that defendant's answer violated Appeals Board rules by attaching improper documents.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien claimantLien trialDismissalAppeals Board Rule 10562(e)(1)Good causeCode of Civil Procedure section 473Defendant's AnswerAppeals Board Rule 10842(c)Discarded documents
References
3
Case No. ADJ3025610 (LAO 0804371) ADJ2399189 (LAO 0833561) ADJ616704 (LAO 0833554) ADJ2590395 (LAO 0833562)
Regular
Jun 18, 2019

ROSA RENTERIA, vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of their lien dismissal for failing to appear at a noticed lien conference. The lien claimant argued human error constituted excusable neglect under CCP 473(b). The WCJ found no good cause for the non-appearance and dismissed the lien. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the dismissal because the explanation of "human error" was skeletal and did not adequately explain the failure to appear or demonstrate good cause.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimWCJRule 10562CCP 473(b)Excusable NeglectGood CauseFox v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
1
Case No. ADJ7300335
Regular
Jun 04, 2019

LINDA PAUL vs. ALICE’S PRESCHOOL, NATIONAL LIABILITY & FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY administered by AMERICAN COMMERCIAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a judge's order dismissing lien claimant Western Imaging's lien. Western Imaging failed to appear at a lien conference, which the judge dismissed under WCAB Rule 10562. The Appeals Board found that a calendaring error, as claimed by Western Imaging, did not constitute good cause for relief under CCP 473(b), especially given that the representative was present when the hearing was continued. Therefore, the dismissal of the lien claim was upheld.

Lien ClaimantReconsiderationWCJDismissing Lien ClaimWCAB Rule 10562CCP 473(b)Human ErrorCalendaring ErrorGood CauseFox v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
3
Case No. ADJ6545416
Regular
Jun 10, 2016

CARLOS LOPEZ vs. MUSEUM SQUARE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND INSURED

Tri-County Medical Group sought reconsideration of a dismissal for non-appearance at a lien trial, arguing their representative had a conflicting appearance and this constituted excusable neglect. While a notice of representation was filed, the Board denied reconsideration. The Board found Tri-County failed to provide adequate grounds for relief under CCP 473(b), as the representative's attendance at other matters, without prior notice to the court, did not rise to the level of excusable neglect. Therefore, the dismissal of Tri-County's lien stands.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien Claim DismissalReconsiderationNon-AppearanceLien ConferenceExcusable NeglectCode of Civil Procedure Section 473(b)Petition for ReconsiderationNotice of RepresentationWCJ
References
1
Case No. ADJ2041939 (SBR 0340035)
Regular
Dec 14, 2016

Carlos Garcia vs. Department of Transportation, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns petitions for reconsideration of three dismissed medical liens filed by Pinnacle Lien Services (PLS) on behalf of three doctors. PLS failed to appear at a lien conference and did not respond to Notices of Intent to Dismiss. The WCAB denied reconsideration, finding PLS provided insufficient justification for its failures to appear and respond, and that relief under CCP § 473 was not warranted due to lack of proper documentation and communication breakdowns. The Board emphasized the need for a substantial explanation for non-appearance and failure to respond to dismissal notices.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrders Dismissing LiensPetitions for ReconsiderationLien ConferenceNotices of Intent to DismissFailure to AppearExcusable NeglectCCP § 473Fox v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Discretionary Relief
References
1
Case No. ADJ9653107
Regular
Jun 04, 2015

FERNANDO ALVARADO vs. FRIENDLY FRANCHISEES CORPORATION dba DFG RESTAURANTS, UNITED STATES F FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, CRUM & FORSTER

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by the defendant, Friendly Franchisees Corporation. The defendant sought to remove an order that continued a workers' compensation hearing to allow the applicant to submit exhibits. The Appeals Board denied the petition, citing that removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board found that the judge's decision to allow the applicant to enter medical evidence, under CCP § 473, outweighed any alleged harm to the defendant and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. Therefore, the Petition for Removal was denied.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationADJ9653107AOE/COE trialCal. Code of Civil Procedure § 473inadvertent omission
References
5
Case No. ADJ1571027 (LAO 0858249) ADJ2009911 (LAO 0858250)
Regular
Nov 02, 2011

STEPHANIE NEAL vs. LOWE'S, SEDGWICK 14450 LONG BEACH

This case concerns a lien claimant, Dr. Burstein, who sought reconsideration after his lien was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Judge. The dismissal was based on Dr. Burstein's repeated failure to appear at multiple scheduled hearings, despite receiving a Notice of Intent to Dismiss. While Dr. Burstein argued for relief under CCP § 473 and WCAB Rule 10866, citing clerical error and inadvertence, the Appeals Board found his explanations unconvincing. The Board concluded that Dr. Burstein failed to provide good cause for his multiple no-shows and denied his petition for reconsideration.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienNotice of Intent to DismissFailure to AppearGood Faith ObjectionClerical ErrorWCAB Rule 10866CCP 473Compromise and Release
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 1999

Karczewicz v. 473 Owners Corp.

The Supreme Court, New York County, granted the defendant residential cooperative corporation's motion for summary judgment, dismissing a personal injury complaint filed by a plaintiff. The defendant argued that the plaintiff was its employee, making the action barred by Workers' Compensation Law exclusivity provisions. Defendant supported its claim with affidavits from its president, building superintendent, and managing agent, asserting personal knowledge of the plaintiff's employment, hiring, supervision, and payment by the defendant. The appellate court found these affidavits sufficient to establish a prima facie entitlement to judgment. In opposition, the plaintiff presented only unsworn documents, including an earnings statement from 'Melohn Payroll Account' and Workers' Compensation Board correspondence listing 'Melohn Payroll Account' as the employer. These documents were deemed insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact and were consistent with defendant's explanation that Melohn Properties, Inc. provided payroll services funded by the defendant. The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, noting the plaintiff's failure to address evidence of direct employment by the defendant.

Personal InjuryWorkers' Compensation ExclusivitySummary Judgment MotionEmployer-Employee DisputeAffirmanceEvidentiary StandardsAppellate DivisionMaintenance WorkPayroll ServicesProcedural Law
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 35 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