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. WCK 45264
En Banc
Aug 25, 2004

James L. Leinon vs. Fishermen's Grotto, Mid-Century Insurance Company

The Appeals Board held that a penalty under Labor Code section 4650(d) does not apply to disputed disability indemnity payments that are made within 14 days of a final order, decision, or award that imposes liability for those benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 4650(d)Temporary Disability Indemnity (TDI)PenaltyReconsiderationEn Banc DecisionInjury disputeDisability disputeIndemnity rate disputeFinal order
References
Case No. ADJ10618021
Regular
Mar 06, 2020

MARIA GUADALUPE GASCA vs. PAGES PRODUCE COMPANY, dba LA MEXICANA FOOD, ICW GROUP

This case concerns a dispute over entitlement to a new Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, rescinding the prior Findings of Fact. The central issue is whether the applicant is entitled to a new QME panel, as the WCAB found the prior WCJ's decision on this interlocutory matter was inadequately supported by evidence. Specifically, the record lacked definitive proof of when the claim forms were filed with the employer, which is critical to determining the applicability of relevant case law like *Navarro*. The matter is returned to the trial level for further development of this evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationPanel QMEFindings of FactRemovalThreshold IssueInterlocutory IssueMedical-Legal EvaluationClaim FormNavarro v. City of MontebelloCompensability
References
Case No. SAU8813471
Regular
Feb 07, 2023

KIMBERLY KENNEY vs. SEGUOYAH, INC., FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for removal of an order consolidating liens and imposing a temporary stay. The consolidation aims to resolve a common legal issue regarding whether the lien claimant is controlled by a criminally charged physician, which would trigger an automatic stay under Labor Code section 4615. The Board found no due process violation, as the order only stays other lien issues pending the common issue's adjudication. Furthermore, the consolidation serves judicial efficiency by avoiding duplicate rulings on this critical threshold matter.

WCABPetition for RemovalOrder of Consolidation and StayLien ClaimantLabor Code section 4615Due ProcessIssue PreclusionConsolidation OrderWCJFarmers Insurance Exchange
References
Case No. ADJ11364300
Regular
May 24, 2019

JOHN MANNING vs. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY

This case involves a dispute over an applicant's entitlement to an Independent Medical Examiner (IME) under an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) agreement governing workers' compensation claims. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding the original order was not a final decision. However, the WCAB granted the petition for removal, rescinded the administrative law judge's finding that no IME was warranted, and returned the case for further proceedings. The WCAB determined it was unclear whether it had jurisdiction to rule on the medical-legal discovery dispute, as parties cannot confer jurisdiction by stipulation, and ordered the trial judge to determine if the ADR program or the WCAB has jurisdiction.

ADR agreementCalifornia Labor Code §3201.7Independent Medical Examiner (IME)removalreconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)specific injurycumulative traumafire captainskin cancer
References
Case No. ADJ8620013, ADJ10761228
Regular
Jun 08, 2017

MARK EBERWEIN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order. The WCAB further denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from denial. The WCJ's decision addressed an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue, not a substantive right or threshold issue. Therefore, neither reconsideration nor removal was deemed appropriate at this stage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ10652805
Regular
Nov 16, 2018

JESUS ARELLANO vs. RJP FRAMING, INC.; REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration because it was taken from a non-final interlocutory order. The order at issue, which closed discovery, did not determine substantive rights, liabilities, or a threshold issue fundamental to the claim. Therefore, it was not a final order as required for reconsideration under Labor Code sections 5900(a), 5902, and 5903. The Board also found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if the petition were treated as a request for removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueRemoval
References
Case No. ADJ11401401, ADJ12385898
Regular
Mar 13, 2023

DONALD TOOMER vs. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, STONINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Donald Toomer's petition because it was filed as a petition for reconsideration but the issues raised were only subject to the extraordinary remedy of removal. Although the WCJ's decision addressed a threshold issue, making it a final order, the petitioner only disputed interlocutory findings. The WCAB found no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm from denying removal, and therefore denied the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code § 5909Due ProcessTollingThreshold IssueFinal DecisionInterlocutory IssueRemoval Standard
References
Case No. ADJ12788878
Regular
Dec 10, 2020

MARIO LUPERCIO PEREZ vs. ARMANDO CHAN dba CHAN DRAINAGE, MARKEL INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed as a removal petition challenging interlocutory issues. Although the WCJ's decision contained a final threshold finding of injury AOE/COE, the defendant only disputed the specialty of a QME and the timeliness of an objection, which are interlocutory. The Board found no significant prejudice or irreparable harm to justify removal, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy later if a final adverse decision issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationThreshold IssueInterlocutory IssueInjury AOE/COEQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Treating Physician ReportRemoval StandardSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ11187851 ADJ11187852
Regular
Nov 19, 2019

HELIA ANGELES DE CORTES vs. MOLEX, INC., OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, BROADSPIRE RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied applicant Helia Angeles De Cortes's Petition for Reconsideration of Joint Findings of Facts. Although the findings included a threshold issue of injury AOE/COE, the petition only disputed an interlocutory issue regarding a replacement QME panel. The Board found that removal was not warranted as applicant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, and reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. Therefore, the petition was denied.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalJoint Findings of FactsThreshold IssueFinal DecisionInterlocutory IssueInjury AOE/COELabor Code § 5909Tolling
References
Showing 1-10 of 5,754 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