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. ADJ1603747 (LBO 0364640) ADJ6857559
Regular
Mar 24, 2010

ROSARIO ESPINOZA vs. RECHE CANYON CONVALESCENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration/removal. The defendant argued they were denied due process by an administrative order compelling document production, as they claimed never to have received the underlying motion and lacked opportunity to respond. However, the WCAB found the petition moot because the disputed lien claim was subsequently resolved by stipulation and order. The WCAB also noted the defendant's petition was filed the day before a hearing where the issue could have been rectified, and questioned why the defendant didn't withdraw the petition after the resolution.

Order Compelling Production of DocumentsPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removallien claimantMotion to Compeldue processmootStipulation and Order to Pay Lien ClaimantWCAB
References
Case No. ADJ1415058 (FRE 0192009) MF ADJ4686427 (FRE 0193449)
Regular
Dec 18, 2017

ANGEL VALENZUELA vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

The defendant employer sought removal to challenge an order compelling the deposition of their claims adjuster and production of documents. The defendant argued that as a legally uninsured employer, discovery from their adjuster (SCIF/SCS) required subpoenas, not just notice. The Appeals Board denied removal, holding that workers' compensation proceedings are not bound by civil discovery rules and the adjuster, as the employer's agent, is subject to discovery via notice. The Board found no irreparable prejudice and affirmed the WCJ's order compelling discovery.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeMotion to Compel DepositionProduction of DocumentsState Compensation Insurance FundLegally Uninsured EmployerSubpoenaService of NoticeLabor Code
References
Case No. ADJ6784736
Regular
May 24, 2010

CYNTHIA ARMANDO vs. ENDODONTIC ASSOCIATES CORP., TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order compelling production of claims file documents. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the original order, and issued a new order. The new order requires the defendant to produce non-privileged portions of the claims file and witness statements, and to describe any privileged documents separately. The Board also clarified that statutory privilege provisions, including attorney work product, are applicable in workers' compensation proceedings.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationClaims Investigation FileAttorney Workproduct PrivilegeWitness StatementsInterim OrderSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmAbsolute Work ProductQualified Work Product
References
Case No. ADJ1274207 (LAO 0744227) ADJ1596712 (VNO 0436062)
Regular
May 21, 2012

JOSE DIAZ vs. ARBEN CORPORATION dba IN & OUT CAR WASH; CIGA by its servicing facility SEDGWICK CMS for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE CO. in liquidation

The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the lien claimants' Petition for Reconsideration. The Board found that the Workers' Compensation Judge's discovery order compelling production was not a final order subject to reconsideration under Labor Code section 5900. Furthermore, the lien claimants failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, thus the Petition for Removal was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder To Compel ProductionDiscovery OrderFinal OrderPetition for RemovalSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary RemedySubstantive Rights
References
Case No. ADJ6413644
Regular
Apr 24, 2009

JANICE HOWELL vs. NATIONAL MENTOR HOLDINGS, dba COLE VOCATIONAL SERVICES, administered by ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order determining substantive rights or liabilities. The petition also sought removal, which was denied as the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The underlying issues, such as an order compelling medical record production, are interlocutory procedural matters not subject to reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and recommendation, denying both reconsideration and removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightRemovalWCJ Report and RecommendationStipulationsOrder Compelling Production of RecordsDiscovery ProcessPrivacy
References
Case No. ADJ4595703 (LBO 0379028)
Regular
Jun 08, 2012

Carlos Penaloza vs. TMP SERVICES, INC., INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to find defendant liable for sanctions due to its repeated failure to serve medical reports on the lien claimant as required by WCAB Rule 10608. This failure, despite multiple requests and two judicial orders, constituted sanctionable conduct for causing unnecessary delay and was not excused by inadvertence. The case is remanded to the trial level for determination of the lien claimant's reasonable expenses and any additional sanction up to $2,500.

WCAB Rule 10608Lien claimantSanctionsFrivolous litigationBad faithMedical reportsService of documentsDiscovery orderMotion to compelCompel production
References
Case No. ADJ621008 (MON 0291717)
Regular
Sep 05, 2012

WILLIAM KEY vs. PRODUCTION PROCESSING, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS, LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, STONE STANLEY PRODUCTIONS, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

This case involves a workers' compensation claim where the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA), covering Legion Insurance, seeks reconsideration of an arbitrator's award. The arbitrator found both CIGA and Travelers, insurer for the special employer, jointly liable for the applicant's injury and ordered Travelers to reimburse CIGA for all benefits paid since Legion's liquidation. CIGA contested being required to continue administering medical treatment and the denial of pre-judgment interest from Travelers. The Board granted reconsideration to amend the award, ordering Travelers to administer future medical treatment, but affirmed the denial of pre-judgment interest to CIGA.

CIGALegion InsuranceProduction ProcessingStone Stanley ProductionsSt. Paul TravelersWilliam Keyindustrial injurylow backliquidationother insurance
References
Case No. ADJ423557 (ANA 0341897)
Regular
Aug 30, 2010

BARTOLLO TERRONES vs. REMEDY TEMP, RELIANCE NATIONAL INDEMNITY, U.S. TILE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Select Staffing's petition for removal, upholding a WCJ's order compelling depositions and document production. Select argued the WCJ lacked jurisdiction over its non-party witnesses and demanded confidential financial documents. The WCAB found Labor Code Section 5710 allows compelling depositions of non-party witnesses, and the WCJ has jurisdiction to order production of the purchase agreement, with claims of privilege to be adjudicated later. No substantial prejudice to Select was found to warrant disturbing the WCJ's order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalDeposition of WitnessesMotion to Compel AttendanceNotice to ProduceStaffing AgencyGeneral EmployerSpecial EmployerCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)Labor Code Section 5710
References
Case No. ADJ7096387; ADJ7096382
Regular
Feb 23, 2012

CHRISTOPHER LEEN vs. CHART HOUSE ENTERPRISES, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal and rescinded an order compelling the applicant's attendance at a medical evaluation. The applicant argued they were denied due process because the judge issued the order compelling attendance and suspending proceedings just one day after the applicant received the defendant's petition, without a hearing or proper notice. The Board agreed that the rapid issuance of the order violated due process rights, particularly as it suspended the applicant's ability to proceed with their case. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, allowing the applicant an opportunity to be heard.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalOrder Compelling AttendanceMedical EvaluationAgreed Medical EvaluatorDue ProcessPetition to CompelNotice of IntentionWalk-through PetitionAppeals Board Rule
References
Case No. ADJ7247116 ADJ7241415 ADJ7407598 ADJ9052220 ADJ9432209
Regular
Feb 12, 2015

DOROTHY TRISTAN vs. CITY OF FRESNO, AMERICAN ALL-RISK LOSS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for removal regarding a discovery order. The employer argued that releasing documents related to a prior DFEH/EEOC discrimination claim and allowing a continued deposition would cause irreparable harm due to privilege concerns. The Board found the employer failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, emphasizing that privilege objections can still be raised for specific documents. The Board also noted the prolonged discovery dispute and encouraged expeditious resolution of the underlying workers' compensation claims.

Petition for RemovalMotion to QuashDepositionDocument ProductionPrivileged RecordsDFEHEEOCLabor Code Section 132aDiscovery DisputeMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Showing 1-10 of 566 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