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. VNO 0450531
Regular
Jun 12, 2008

NELSON PIMENTEL (Deceased) CLAUDIA CISNEROS, Guardian Ad Litem for SUMMER PIMENTEL vs. DAYNITE FACILITIES; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to address an attorney's fee dispute and a request for disqualification of the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The WCAB increased the attorney's fee awarded to Ronald Ehrman to $4,800.00, finding that he had cured prior notification defects regarding his adverse interest in seeking additional fees. Additionally, the WCAB disqualified the original WCJ, finding that his criticisms of Ehrman's conduct created an appearance of bias, and reassigned the case to a new WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeath BenefitsAttorney's FeesGuardian Ad LitemReconsiderationDisqualificationWCJAdverse InterestEthics ViolationsPenalties
References
3
Case No. ADJ15136580
Regular
May 09, 2025

Neal Newton vs. Rudgear Logistics, LLC.; Falls Lake Fire & Casualty

Applicant Neal Newton filed a petition to disqualify the trial Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ), alleging bias and the expression of unqualified opinions during hearings. The applicant contended the WCJ belittled his personal physician, questioned his intelligence, and demonstrated bias against his video evidence. Despite the WCJ denying actual bias, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found an 'appearance of bias' sufficient to warrant disqualification, particularly noting the WCJ's characterization of applicant's documents without full review. Consequently, the Board granted the petition, disqualified the assigned WCJ, and ordered the case reassigned to a new WCJ.

Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAppearance of BiasMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedQualified Medical EvaluatorEvidence DisputeMed-Legal EvaluationCode of Civil Procedure
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Schairer v. Schairer

The wife filed a motion to disqualify the law firm of Sari Friedman, P.C. from representing her husband in their ongoing divorce proceedings, citing a conflict of interest. This conflict stemmed from Ms. Friedman's prior representation of the court-appointed custody forensic expert in his own divorce case in 1995. The husband cross-moved to disqualify the same forensic expert, alleging potential bias against police officers and Ms. Friedman's previous representation of the expert. The court found a clear appearance of a conflict of interest, as Ms. Friedman could not effectively cross-examine her former client, the expert, without potentially using privileged confidential information. Consequently, the court granted the wife's motion to disqualify Sari Friedman, P.C. and denied the husband's cross-motion, determining that any claims of bias against the expert could be addressed during trial.

DivorceAttorney DisqualificationConflict of InterestForensic ExpertCustodySpousal DisputeProfessional EthicsConfidentialityLegal RepresentationJudicial Opinion
References
10
Case No. ADJ317667
Regular
Jun 15, 2018

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

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to exclude defendant's expert biomechanical reports, finding discovery closed prior to their submission and defendant failed to demonstrate due diligence. The Board also denied defendant's request to disqualify the WCJ, as no specific facts establishing bias were presented. Removal was deemed an inappropriate remedy due to the lack of shown substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, the WCJ's evidentiary ruling and refusal to disqualify were upheld.

RemovalForensic Biomechanical ExpertExclusion of EvidenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery ClosureDue DiligenceWCJ DisqualificationBias AllegationWCAB Rule 10452Labor Code § 5502
References
8
Case No. ADJ12674446
Regular
Jul 25, 2025

MICHAEL KREZA, SHANNA KREZA vs. CITY OF COSTA MESA FIRE DEPARTMENT, ADMINSURE

Applicant Shanna Kreza, guardian ad Litem for deceased Michael Kreza, sought reconsideration or, alternatively, removal and disqualification of a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) after the WCJ issued an Order Suspending Action. The WCJ's order questioned the requested attorney's fees as excessive, which the applicant argued created an appearance of bias. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration, deeming the WCJ's order interlocutory. However, the Board granted the petitions for removal and disqualification, finding an appearance of bias by the WCJ due to unqualified opinions on attorney's fees. Consequently, the WCJ was disqualified, their May 12, 2025 Order was rescinded, and the case was returned for reassignment to a new WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFirefighterDeath ClaimAttorney FeesExcessive FeesPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWCJ BiasOrder Suspending Action
References
10
Case No. ADJ4237156
Regular
Nov 15, 2011

CON HOWE vs. AMERIGAS by SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

This case involves an applicant's petition to disqualify a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) due to alleged bias stemming from a prior incident. The applicant's attorney claimed the WCJ harbored enmity and would prejudice his clients. The WCJ, in his report, stated the incident would not affect his impartiality and all cases are decided on evidence. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied the disqualification petition, finding no reason to doubt the WCJ's impartiality.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJ BiasEnmityMandatory Settlement ConferencesReport and RecommendationEvidence-based DecisionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeApplicant's AttorneyCase ADJ4237156
References
0
Case No. ADJ239802
Regular
Aug 10, 2010

MARIO PENA vs. ADVANCED CARGO SERVICES CORP

The Appeals Board granted removal, amending the WCJ's order to compel the defendant to provide all medical reports in its possession, not just those it intended to rely upon, as required by regulation. The Board struck the WCJ's order regarding proof of interpreter market rates, finding it was not an issue before the WCJ. The Board also denied the lien claimant's request to disqualify the WCJ, finding no evidence of bias.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalLien ClaimantMedical ReportsMarket RateInterpreter ServicesBiasWCJAdministrative Law JudgeCalifornia Code of Regulations
References
18
Case No. ADJ9447222
Regular
Jun 23, 2015

Gloria Gutierrez vs. Moonlight Companies, Zenith Insurance Company

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition to disqualify the Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The applicant alleged the WCJ formed an unqualified opinion on the merits of the case. While the WCJ initially dismissed the claim based on a misunderstanding of the law, he later rescinded the dismissal and scheduled further proceedings. The Board found no evidence the WCJ formed an unqualified opinion and believes he can render a fair hearing.

Petition for disqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJunqualified opinionmerits of actionLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)post-termination defensereporting of injuriesCode of Civil Procedure section 641(f)Order Rescinding Dismissal
References
0
Case No. SDO 0316261
Regular
Jul 30, 2007

Marva Smith vs. SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Marva Smith's petition to disqualify the administrative law judge (WCJ). Smith argued the WCJ had a conflict of interest due to prior employment with SCIF, which she claimed was a former claims processor for her employer, and that the WCJ might be a material witness. The Board found no evidence connecting the WCJ's prior employment to the current case or establishing her as a material witness, thus denying the disqualification petition.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJState Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF)Conflict of InterestPrior EmploymentMaterial WitnessDisputed Evidentiary FactsAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)San Diego State University
References
0
Case No. ADJ7457608
Regular
Oct 18, 2011

CLARENCE MILES vs. KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a petition to disqualify a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) due to alleged bias against the applicant's attorney. The applicant's attorney claimed the WCJ demonstrated enmity after a September 1, 2011 incident, which would prejudice his clients. The WCJ submitted a report stating that the incident would not affect his impartiality and that all decisions are based on evidence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, finding no reason to doubt the WCJ's assurance of fairness.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJ BiasAdministrative Law JudgeEnmityPrejudiceMandatory Settlement ConferenceReport and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardEvidenceDay in Court
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 6,438 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