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. GOL 0088273
Regular
Aug 18, 2008

ROBERT SIEBURG vs. RONALD WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the case for further development of the record. The Board found the findings of the administrative law judge regarding $97\%$ permanent disability and apportionment were not supported by substantial medical evidence. Specifically, the opinion of Dr. Kahmann was deemed deficient due to internal inconsistencies, lack of explanation for apportionment, and undefined work restrictions. The Board also found Dr. Basham's report did not meet the standard for substantial medical evidence regarding cognitive dysfunction.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDROBERT SIEBURGRONALD WOLFE & ASSOCIATESSTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDGOL 0088273OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATIONDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONFindings and AwardWCJmaintenance person
References
Case No. ADJ9170309
Regular
Nov 03, 2025

Miguel Mosqueda vs. City of Clearlake

Applicant Miguel Mosqueda sought reconsideration of a July 25, 2025 decision which found his injuries were not caused by the employer's serious and willful misconduct or violation of safety orders. Mosqueda, a maintenance worker, suffered catastrophic injuries, including paraplegia, after falling from a ladder while trimming a tree for the City of Clearlake. He contended that the employer violated several Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8 sections related to safety, training, and equipment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, adopting the WCJ's report, denied the petition for reconsideration, concluding that the employer's actions did not constitute serious and willful misconduct and that no alleged safety violation was the proximate cause of the accident.

Serious and willful misconductPetition for reconsiderationFindings and OrderViolation of statuteViolation of safety orderCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3203Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3276(d)(1)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3276(e)(15)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3421(b)Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3421(d)
References
Case No. ADJ8040967, ADJ8215681
Regular
Feb 25, 2016

MARIA ORTIZ vs. J KOREAN BBQ, FARMERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for removal in *Ortiz v. J Korean BBQ* because it was untimely filed. The petition was submitted on January 25, 2016, exceeding the 25-day deadline from the WCJ's December 18, 2015 decision. Filing with the Board, not just mailing, within the statutory period is required for timeliness. The Board also noted that had the petition been timely, it would have been denied on the merits based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for RemovalUntimely FilingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportCal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10843(a)Cal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10507(a)(1)
References
Case No. ADJ852406
Regular
Feb 24, 2015

TOK SUN SONG vs. CAFE PRINCE aka HWANG TAEJA, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses Tok Sun Song's petition for reconsideration. The dismissal is based on two grounds: the petition was filed untimely, exceeding the statutory 25-day limit after the WCJ's decision. Additionally, the petition was not verified, and the applicant failed to cure this defect or provide a valid explanation within a reasonable time after notice. As these are jurisdictional defects, the Board lacked authority to consider the untimely and unverified petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitVerification DefectCuring DefectsWCAB Rule 10508Labor Code 5900Labor Code 5903Labor Code 5902Cal. Code Regs. 10507
References
Case No. ADJ8733591
Regular
Mar 13, 2017

ANELLA MILES vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petition for removal, rescinding the original order. The WCAB found the original order, which replaced a Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) for alleged unavailability for deposition, was improperly issued due to a lack of a proper record. The WCAB emphasized that a complete record, including stipulations and admitted evidence, is essential for decisions. Therefore, the case was returned to the WCJ for further proceedings with a proper evidentiary record.

Petition for RemovalReplacement QME PanelWCJDepositionCal. Code Regs. §35.5PrejudiceIrreparable HarmMSC Minutes of HearingRule 35.5(f)Mandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ4055046 (VNO 0490494)
Regular
Feb 07, 2011

JAIME AGABO vs. HI-TECH IRON WORKS, APPLIED RISK OMAHA

This case involves an applicant seeking additional compensation for serious and willful misconduct by his employer, Hi-Tech Iron Works, following an industrial injury. The employer's petition for reconsideration of the administrative law judge's (WCJ) award was denied. The Board found substantial evidence supported the WCJ's determination that the employer knew an unsafe rope was being used for heavy lifting and directed employees to proceed despite the probable risk of serious injury. The employer's arguments regarding a Cal-OSHA report and the presence of management were rejected based on credibility findings and the evidence presented.

Serious and willful misconductLabor Code Section 4553inadequate equipmentpulley and ropeunsafe work environmentmanaging representativeknowledge of dangerdisregard of warningemployer liabilityworkers' compensation
References
Case No. ADJ10387444, ADJ10387443
Regular
Sep 19, 2018

TERESA GALLEGOS vs. OMEGA EXTRUDING CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Teresa Gallegos' petition for reconsideration. The petition was deemed "skeletal" for failing to specify grounds, cite evidence, or articulate legal principles. Additionally, it was dismissed for lack of proof of service on the adverse party, Omega Extruding Corporation. The Board noted that even if not dismissed on procedural grounds, the petition would have been denied on the merits based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationSkeletal PetitionProof of ServiceAdverse PartyLabor Code § 5902Appeals Board RulesCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10842Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10846Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10852Labor Code § 5905
References
Case No. ADJ10387805
Regular
Oct 28, 2019

PARDEEP SINGH vs. 7 ELEVEN, MITSUI SUMITOMO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Pardee Singh's Petition for Reconsideration. The petition was deemed untimely because it was filed on August 28, 2019, which was after the jurisdictional deadline of August 26, 2019. This deadline was calculated from the service date of an Order Allowing Costs on August 1, 2019. The WCAB clarified that for a petition to be timely, it must be *received* by the board within the statutory period, not merely mailed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyDismissedWCABWCJLabor Code Section 5900Labor Code Section 5903Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10507Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10508Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10845
References
Case No. ADJ9 025769, ADJ9 029889
Regular
May 02, 2016

JOSH BLACKWELL vs. COUNTY OF LAKE, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision dismisses a petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed significantly after the 25-day jurisdictional deadline, even considering potential extensions. The Board emphasizes that filing means receipt by the WCAB, not just mailing. Although untimely, the Board notes that had it been timely, the petition would have been denied on its merits.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWCJ ReportAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLab. Code §§ 59005903Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10507Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10508
References
Showing 1-10 of 547 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