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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
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. ADJ4353489 (VNO 0469742)
Regular
Aug 18, 2011

, JEFFREY JONES, vs. , INTERLINK MORTGAGE SERVICES; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND,

This case concerns a claimant's eight-year delay in pursuing his workers' compensation claim, during which time he filed an application but took no further action. The claimant then sought to depose a retired QME who is elderly and ill. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no good cause for the deposition due to the claimant's unexplained delay and lack of stated necessity. Consequently, the Board rescinded the orders compelling the deposition and denied the claimant's petition.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)DepositionOrder Compelling DepositionStrike ReportIndustrial InjuryApplication for Adjudication of ClaimPetition for DismissalPetition to Compel DepositionBurden of Proof
References
Case No. LAO 862841
Regular
Feb 28, 2008

BAHATI H. SALAS vs. LIVHOME, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal and quashed the applicant's notice for a second deposition of Dr. Peterson. The Board found no good cause for a second deposition, as the applicant's representative was present at the first and failed to question Dr. Peterson on relevant matters despite having all necessary documentation. Allowing repeated depositions without changed circumstances would be neither expeditious nor inexpensive, contradicting the Board's mandate.

RemovalMotion to QuashDepositionAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Due ProcessGood CauseCredibilitySubsequent DepositionLabor Code 4062.3Substantial Justice
References
Case No. ADJ3213121 (LBO 0361407)
Regular
Aug 30, 2010

GLENDA M. BRUCE vs. COMPTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

The Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, reversing a prior order that quashed the applicant's deposition. The applicant amended her claim to include hair loss and a fall after her last deposition. The Board found good cause for an additional deposition, as the defendant did not have notice of these new claims prior to the previous depositions. Therefore, the applicant is required to submit to a fifth deposition specifically addressing the hair loss and fall allegations.

Petition for RemovalQuashed DepositionCompensable ConsequencesAmended ApplicationIndustrial InjuryHair LossFallPrior NoticeFifth DepositionRescinded Order
References
Case No. ADJ3058631 (FRE 0225238) ADJ4053535 (FRE 0206567)
Regular
May 01, 2018

JOE GUTIERREZ vs. CLOVIS SANGER CABINET MANUFACTURING AND AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal filed by defendants Clovis Sanger Cabinet Manufacturing and American Claims Management. The Board found that defendants failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from an interim order vacating a prior deposition order. Furthermore, the Board determined that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The matter is scheduled for a Mandatory Settlement Conference where the deposition issue can be revisited.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDepositionVacated OrderDiscoveryEx Parte
References
Case No. ADJ7046175
Regular
Jun 07, 2013

, DAVID WILKIE, vs. , CHATEAU HOTEL, and FIRSTCOMP OMAHA for SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY,

This case involves an applicant's petition for removal to the Appeals Board, challenging a WCJ's denial of his petition to quash depositions. The applicant argued improper notice and service of deposition subpoenas, but the WCJ admitted the depositions solely for the purpose of determining timely notice, not for substantive evidence. The Appeals Board denied the removal petition because the applicant had not yet suffered prejudice or irreparable harm, as the depositions had not been used for substantive purposes and he could raise objections later if aggrieved.

Petition for RemovalQuash DepositionsCode of Civil ProcedureCCP section 2025.270Proper NoticeProof of ServiceIndustrial InjuryLeft Upper ExtremityFindings and OrderWCAB Rule 10843
References
Case No. ADJ7621876
Regular
Jan 05, 2012

DAVID ESPINOZA RODRIGUEZ vs. WEST COAST PAINTING, INC., CNA CLAIMS SERVICES

This case concerns defendant West Coast Painting's petition to remove an order quashing their Notice of Deposition for applicant David Espinoza Rodriguez. The defendant argued the quashing occurred in a non-noticed walk-through and asserted new circumstances, including potential back surgery and treatment outside the MPN. However, the Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that the defendant failed to demonstrate good cause for a subsequent deposition and that no irreparable harm would result from denying it. The denial is consistent with Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.610, which generally limits parties to one deposition per deponent without good cause shown.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardQuashed DepositionSubsequent DepositionGood CauseSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWCJ ReportMedical Provider NetworkBack Surgery
References
Case No. ADJ14275855
Regular
Jan 20, 2023

MARIA ANA TAYROS vs. CITY OF GREENFIELD, ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES

Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding a prior order compelling payment to a Qualified Medical Examiner (QME). The defendant sought to avoid paying the QME an additional deposition fee after a prior deposition was aborted due to technical issues, despite having paid for preparation and attempted appearance. The Board found that the QME was entitled to the statutory minimum two-hour payment for the rescheduled deposition, including preparation time, as the initial failure to depose was not the QME's fault. The Board also clarified that the defendant's petition was treated as one for reconsideration, not removal, and was denied on its merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalQualified Medical Examiner (QME)Deposition FeeMedical-Legal TestimonyAdministrative Director Rule 9795Payment of Expert Witness FeeCode of Civil Procedure Section 2034.450Labor Code Section 5710
References
Case No. ADJ8241877
Regular
May 02, 2014

CONNA NICHOLS, DONNA NICHOLS, DONNA M. NICHOLS vs. EARLY LEARNING INSTITUTE, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY CO.

This case concerns a Petition for Removal denied by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The applicant, Donna Nichols, sought removal of an order compelling her deposition, alleging defects and medical inability to attend. The WCAB adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) report, which found the petition lacked merit. The WCJ reasoned that the deposition order was not a "walk-through" petition and that the applicant's medical evidence was insufficient to justify further delay.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor Code section 5313Smales v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.ADJ8241877depositionPetition to Compel Attendance at DepositionDeclaration of Readiness to Proceedwalk-through petition
References
Showing 1-10 of 705 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