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. ADJ3808038 (LAO 0819022)
Regular
Feb 11, 2010

NICOLAS F. BENINKOFF (Deceased), LORENA BENINKOFF (Widow) vs. DARCO METAL SURFACING, INC.; and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board denied petitions for removal and reconsideration from lien claimants and the defendant, and denied the applicant's reconsideration petition. Lien claimants Kan and Ace's petition for removal was denied as they failed to show substantial prejudice, and their reconsideration petition was dismissed as the prior order was not final. The applicant's reconsideration petition was denied because her claim for home healthcare services was deemed an untimely lien claim under Labor Code section 4903.5.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalReconsiderationLien ClaimantsUntimely LienLabor Code section 4903.5Labor Code section 5405Home Healthcare ServicesMedical TreatmentTransportation Expenses
References
5
Case No. ADJ2263363 (SAC 0291821) ADJ2654728 (SAC 0291246)
Regular
Dec 05, 2008

LEROY ARMSTRONG vs. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, SLIPFORM CONCRETE, BROADSPIRE, California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA), Legion Insurance, State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), Fireman's Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed CIGA's petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's deferral of CIGA's requested issues was not a final order, and CIGA was not aggrieved. The Board also denied CIGA's petition for removal, finding no extraordinary circumstances. Finally, the Board denied SCIF's petition for reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ's determination that the applicant's claim against Environmental Construction was timely.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCIGASCIFReconsiderationRemovalPetitionFinal OrderStatute of LimitationsIndustrial InjuryDeferred Issue
References
7
Case No. ADJ8213064, ADJ8222631
Regular
Jan 22, 2016

MUBINA KUSLJUGIC vs. COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FOR RETARDED & HANDICAPPED, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, ENDURANCE MARKEL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted SCIF's Petition for Reconsideration to amend the Findings, Award, and Orders to dismiss the applicant's claim for a specific back injury and correct a clerical error. SCIF's Petition for Removal, seeking WCJ disqualification, was denied as improperly filed and skeletal. The applicant's Petition for Removal regarding further development of the record was also denied, as reconsideration was deemed the appropriate remedy for a final order, and the Board found the issues properly before them. All other aspects of the original Findings, Award, and Orders were affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAgreed Medical ExaminerCumulative InjurySpecific InjuryPermanent DisabilityDiscovery MatterAttorney-Client PrivilegeCode of Civil Procedure
References
9
Case No. ADJ317667 (SDO 0346814)
Regular
Nov 15, 2019

NANCY COBB vs. BIOSITE INCORPORATED, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST, YORK RISK SERVICES

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from an intermediate procedural order, not a final decision that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and determined reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. Finally, the Petition for Disqualification was denied based on the Workers' Compensation Judge's report. The case is returned to the Workers' Compensation Judge to issue a decision on the submitted issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for Disqualificationfinal ordersubstantive rightliabilitythreshold issueinterlocutory orderprocedural decision
References
7
Case No. ADJ300431 (FRE 0203618) ADJ1896245 (FRE 0203619) ADJ3576423 (FRE 0203620)
Regular
Jan 14, 2014

Sherrill Perkins vs. Fresno Unified School District

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for removal but granted her petition for reconsideration. Applicant's 40-page petition for reconsideration violated the 25-page limit and lacked good cause for exceeding it. Therefore, the Board will dismiss the petition unless a compliant one is refiled within ten days, while simultaneously addressing the attorney's separate fee reconsideration. The Board found no extraordinary circumstances to justify removal and will proceed with reconsideration after compliance with filing rules.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardWCJcumulative traumatemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityapportionmentpenalties
References
2
Case No. ADJ10416081
Regular
Feb 25, 2019

CAROLINA MONTES vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration and dismissed their Petition for Removal. The judge's prior decision included a finding of injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) based on stipulation and denied the defendant's request for sanctions. These latter findings are considered final orders, making a Petition for Reconsideration the appropriate avenue for relief, not removal. Therefore, both the Petition for Reconsideration and Petition for Removal were denied and dismissed, respectively.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPQMEAOE/COEstipulationsanctionsLabor Code section 5813final ordersubstantive right
References
4
Case No. ADJ8668744
Regular
Apr 07, 2015

MARIA ESPINOZA vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Applicant Espinoza's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from an interlocutory order, not a final decision that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denying this extraordinary remedy. Applicant failed to demonstrate that reconsideration would be inadequate should a final adverse decision occur later. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal were dismissed and denied, respectively.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary RemedySubstantial Prejudice
References
6
Case No. ADJ9214889
Regular
Dec 08, 2014

JIE BAI vs. PEBBLE BEACH, INTERCARE

This case involves applicant Jie Bai's petitions for reconsideration and removal stemming from two separate orders by the Workers' Compensation Judge. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both petitions, adopting the judge's reasoning. Reconsideration was denied regarding sanctions imposed on applicant's attorney for a late appearance, finding the attorney's tardiness and lack of excuse justified the sanction. Removal was denied regarding a change of venue to Salinas, as the judge found good cause based on the applicant's residence, injury location, and logistical convenience, despite the applicant's counsel's objections.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Imposing SanctionsOrder Changing VenueWorkers' Compensation JudgeLabor Code §5813Title 8CCR §10561Failure to Appear
References
0
Case No. ADJ1524475 (RIV 0046648) ADJ4641802 (RIV 0046649
Regular
Mar 01, 2019

BONNIE L. BENTLEY vs. SORA MANAGEMENT, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOC. for Legion Insurance, In Liquidation

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration and a Petition for Removal challenging a WCJ's order vacating submission and allowing further development of the record. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order was an interlocutory procedural decision, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be inadequate. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal were dismissed and denied, respectively.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderVacating SubmissionFurther Development of RecordSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary RemedyWCJ Report
References
6
Case No. ADJ9219579
Regular
Feb 02, 2015

MICHAEL HENNESSEY vs. COMPASS GROUP, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Removal, treating it as a Petition for Reconsideration because the original order was final. After reviewing the WCJ's report and the record, the WCAB denied the Petition for Reconsideration. Therefore, the WCAB dismissed the removal petition and denied the reconsideration petition.

Petition for RemovalFindings Award OrderWCJPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsFinal OrderADJ9219579
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 27,640 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