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. ADJ7016910, ADJ7016880
Regular
Jan 25, 2017

DENNIS LEBER vs. HOWARDS APPLIANCES, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

This case involves a lien dismissal for non-payment of a $100 activation fee. The lien claimant argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay based on a federal court order and a DWC Newsline. The Appeals Board intends to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days, based on the interpretation that the federal court order allowed payment between November 9 and December 31, 2015. If the fee is paid, the lien claim will proceed to the trial level.

Lien activation feeLabor Code § 4903.06Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimDWC NewslineU.S. District CourtPreliminary injunctionAngelotti Chiropractic v. BakerDIR Newsline
References
Case No. ADJ1035201
Regular
Oct 04, 2016

VICTOR DURAN vs. DONUT INN, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board is considering rescinding an order that dismissed Metro Med Shockwave's lien claim for failure to pay a $\$100$ lien activation fee. The WCJ dismissed the lien because the fee was not paid before the lien conference, citing prior precedent. However, the lien claimant argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay the fee based on a DWC Newsline article referencing a court order. The Board intends to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days, allowing further proceedings on the lien claim.

Labor Code section 4903.06Lien activation feeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMetro Med ShockwaveFigueroa v. B.C Doering Co.Angelotti Chiropractic v. BakerPreliminary injunctionDWC NewslineReconsiderationRescind order
References
Case No. ADJ7271033
Regular
Jan 25, 2017

JENNIFER LAWSON vs. GLEN IVY DAY SPA, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is considering rescinding an order that dismissed lien claimant Proex Diagnostics' lien for failure to pay a \$100 activation fee. Proex argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay the fee based on a federal court order and DWC guidance. The WCAB's notice indicates they intend to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days of the notice. If rescinded, the lien claim will return to the trial level for further proceedings.

Proex DiagnosticsGlen Ivy Day SpaCompWest Insurance CompanyBerkshire Hathaway Homestate CompaniesLien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJReconsiderationCompromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ8501518
Regular
Mar 21, 2014

PAMELA LIBERA vs. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, CORVEL CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Pamela Libera's Petition for Removal. The WCAB found that the Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC) is statutorily responsible for providing district office quarters within budgetary constraints. Even if venue is established, the WCAB can calendar hearings at different locations due to limited resources. The WCAB also noted available alternatives like CourtCall for parties facing travel difficulties.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for RemovalDivision of Workers' CompensationDWCWCABvenuedistrict officecalenderingCourtCallmandatory settlement conference
References
Case No. ADJ6791157
Regular
May 12, 2011

NAIRA SHIRINYAN vs. MACY'S WEST, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves an applicant who sustained a work injury and disputes the defendant's compliance with medical provider network (MPN) requirements. The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's order that the defendant properly managed the MPN and did not owe for self-procured treatment. The Board returned the case to the trial level to address whether the defendant's MPN was properly established and approved by the DWC, and to address an issue regarding AD Rule 9767.12, which the WCJ had not decided. The applicant's argument about posting notices was waived as it was not raised at the mandatory settlement conference or trial.

Medical Provider NetworkMPNReconsiderationFindings and OrderMerchandising AssociateLabor Code SectionsDivision of Workers' CompensationDWCAdministrative DirectorAD Rule
References
Case No. ADJ7359102 ADJ7831301
Regular
Apr 05, 2017

VERONICA PEREZ vs. CLASSIC PARTY RENTALS, OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORP.

The lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed because it sought review of a dismissal by operation of law, which is not a final order subject to reconsideration. The Appeals Board granted removal to address the issue of whether the lien claimant timely filed a required declaration under Labor Code section 4903.05(c). This action is based on the principle that parties have a right to due process and a hearing to prove timely filing. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on the timeliness of the declaration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code Section 4903.05(c)Declaration RequirementDismissal by Operation of LawJose Guillermina Rodriguez v. Garden Planting Co.Due ProcessFair Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Nov 04, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board grants reconsideration on its own motion to make its prior September 26, 2011 decision, concerning the timelines for QME panel requests, apply prospectively to prevent disruption in ongoing cases.

Appeals Board MotionReconsiderationNotice of IntentionModify OpinionClerical ErrorAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Panel RequestLabor Code section 4062.2(b)Prospective Application
References
Case No. ADJ284173 (ANA 0289120) ADJ2551230 (ANA 0289121)
Regular
Apr 08, 2009

GILDARDO INZUNZA vs. WEBSTER, ET AL.; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND

Applicant petitioned for removal, seeking a WCAB order to compel the Rehabilitation Unit to issue a determination regarding rehabilitation benefits. However, Labor Code section 139.5, governing vocational rehabilitation, was repealed effective January 1, 2009, divesting the Rehabilitation Unit of further authority. While issues appealed before that date can be heard by the WCAB, the applicant's petition for removal is denied as it does not meet the procedural requirements for such action before a Workers' Compensation Judge. The applicant should file a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed to bring the matter before a judge.

Vocational RehabilitationRehabilitation UnitPetition for RemovalLabor Code Section 139.5RepealDWC NewslineDeclaration of ReadinessWCJWCAB Rule 10843Uninsured Employers Fund
References
Case No. ADJ7232076
Significant
Nov 04, 2011

TSEGAY MESSELE vs. PITCO FOODS, INC.; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board grants reconsideration on its own motion to clarify that its prior en banc decision regarding the timeline for selecting a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) will apply prospectively to panel requests made after September 26, 2011, to avoid disrupting ongoing cases.

AME proposalQME panelLabor Code section 4062.2(b)prospective applicationclerical error correctionreconsideration on motionen banc decisionDWC NewslineCalifornia Applicants' Attorneys Associationprematurity objection
References
Case No. ADJ9316587
Regular
May 13, 2014

TORI BLEVINS vs. ELIZABETH J. TILLEY, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns applicant Tori Blevins' petition to change venue from the San Luis Obispo District Office to the Santa Barbara satellite office. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, affirming the administrative law judge's decision. The WCAB concluded that only "district offices," not "satellite offices," are considered for venue determination under Labor Code section 5501.5. This distinction is based on the full staffing, extensive facilities, and daily operations of district offices, contrasting with the limited resources of satellite offices. The WCAB found no basis to overturn the administrative construction that Santa Barbara's office is a satellite, not a district, office.

Petition for RemovalVenueDistrict OfficeSatellite OfficeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code Section 5501.5Department of Workers' CompensationAdministrative ConstructionContemporaneous Administrative ConstructionDWC Newsline
References
Showing 1-10 of 199 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