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. ADJ7256933
Regular
Mar 07, 2014

BRITTANY MILLER vs. CIMMS, INC. dba BURGER KING

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the applicant in a workers' compensation matter before the WCAB. The Board reviewed the petition and the administrative law judge's report, ultimately adopting the judge's recommendation. Consequently, the Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration. Defense counsel also received a admonishment for violating WCAB Rule 10842(c) by attaching excessive documents to their answer.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationReport and Recommendationadministrative law judgedismiss the petitionDefense counseladmonishedexcess documentsWCAB Rule 10842(c)Cal. Code Regs.
References
Case No. ADJ8577310
Regular
Sep 04, 2014

SHEMERA WILLIAMS vs. JP MORGAN CHASE AND COMPANY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration and Removal filed by a party in a workers' compensation claim. The Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. Removal was denied as the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The dismissal was also based on the petition not being served on all adverse parties, and the petitioner was admonished for attaching excess documents.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalDenial of RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionLabor CodeWCAB Rules
References
Case No. ADJ6751296
Regular
May 16, 2012

RYAN MCDONALD vs. IRWIN INDUSTRIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision involving Ryan McDonald and Irwin Industries. The Board upheld sanctions against applicant's attorney for compounding errors and improperly attaching excess documents. The Board clarified that Serious and Willful Misconduct claims under Labor Code section 4553, and all other claims, must first be arbitrated under the Alternative Dispute Resolution process. Only after an arbitration decision can a petition for reconsideration be filed with the Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIrwin IndustriesPermissibly Self-InsuredOpinion and Order Denying ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsApplicant's AttorneyCompounding Errors
References
Case No. ADJ7247116 ADJ7241415 ADJ7407598 ADJ9052220 ADJ9432209
Regular
Feb 12, 2015

DOROTHY TRISTAN vs. CITY OF FRESNO, AMERICAN ALL-RISK LOSS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for removal regarding a discovery order. The employer argued that releasing documents related to a prior DFEH/EEOC discrimination claim and allowing a continued deposition would cause irreparable harm due to privilege concerns. The Board found the employer failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, emphasizing that privilege objections can still be raised for specific documents. The Board also noted the prolonged discovery dispute and encouraged expeditious resolution of the underlying workers' compensation claims.

Petition for RemovalMotion to QuashDepositionDocument ProductionPrivileged RecordsDFEHEEOCLabor Code Section 132aDiscovery DisputeMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ7423046
Regular
Aug 20, 2012

MITCHELL CONTE vs. LYONS MAGNUS, INC., TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT, AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for removal, which the Appeals Board denied. The lien claimant sought to compel discovery of documents from the defendant employer, but their request was deemed "grossly overbroad." The Board noted the lien claimant could have obtained medical reports directly and is not entitled to other documents as they are not a party. The Board also admonished both parties for boilerplate filings that wasted the Board's time.

Petition for RemovalPetition to QuashFirst Request for Production of DocumentsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantOverbroad DiscoveryWCJWalk-through DocumentDeclaration of ReadinessMedical Reports
References
Case No. ADJ-4279077 (SDO 0317244)
Regular
Jun 09, 2016

TINA BARONI vs. CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE NATIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued a Decision After Removal ordering the striking of three sets of documents from the EAMS record. These documents pertained to San Diego Superior Court Case Number 37-2016-00006537-CU-IC-CTL and were submitted without objection. The WCAB previously issued a Notice of Intention to Strike these documents, stating they would be removed unless good cause to the contrary was shown. No objections were received from the parties or the identified attorneys.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalStriking DocumentsEAMS recordCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationReliance National Indemnity CompanyLiquidationSan Diego Superior CourtObjectionGood Cause
References
Case No. ADJ4279077 (SDO 0317244)
Regular
May 05, 2018

TINA BARONI vs. CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE NATIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has removed this case for the stated intention to strike documents filed by attorney Adrienne D. Cohen, who is not of record. These documents, which include notices related to a San Diego Superior Court case and a petition for writ of prohibition, are deemed irrelevant and improperly filed. The WCAB asserts that California Superior Courts lack jurisdiction over the WCAB and that CIGA failed to utilize proper procedural remedies. The WCAB will strike the documents unless good cause is shown to the contrary within ten days.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalStriking DocumentsEAMS RecordCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationReliance National Indemnity CompanyCity of OceansideAdrienne D. CohenNotice of Related CaseWrit of Prohibition
References
Case No. ADJ7252567
Regular
Apr 28, 2011

CURT HARRIS vs. CAR QUEST, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant, Curt Harris, filed a document requesting a change of venue for his workers' compensation case. This document was not verified and was not served on all parties. The Appeals Board construed this as a petition for removal, which is subject to specific procedural rules. Because the petition was untimely filed and failed to meet verification and service requirements, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed it.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalChange of VenueVerified DocumentTimelinessWCAB Rule 10843PWCJOrder DenyingUnverifiedImproper Service
References
Case No. ADJ1527853 (WCK 0005092)
Regular
Dec 05, 2013

JEFF MILLMAN vs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed a prior ruling that it lacks jurisdiction over a contract dispute between Contra Costa County and its excess insurer, General Reinsurance Corporation (GRC). The dispute concerns whether GRC must reimburse the County for certain bill review expenses under their excess policy. The Board determined this is a contract issue between insurer and insured, not a workers' compensation insurance coverage dispute subject to mandatory arbitration under Labor Code section 5275. The parties may pursue remedies like declaratory relief in civil court.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJurisdictionContract DisputeExcess InsuranceSelf-Insured EmployerInsurance CoverageArbitrationLabor CodeInsurance Code
References
Case No. ADJ4687711 (ANA 0381886) ADJ276364 (AHM 0142454)
Regular
Jan 21, 2010

## JOSE BERROSPE (DECEASED) vs. NIGHT SWEEPS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the State Compensation Insurance Fund's (SCIF) Petition for Removal. SCIF sought to avoid producing certain documents related to the deceased worker's dependents to the Death Without Dependents (DWD) Unit, despite stating they would produce documents mentioning DWD to the judge for in-camera review. The petition was dismissed because it was unverified, violating WCAB Rule 10843(b). Furthermore, the WCAB found no merit to the petition, as SCIF indicated compliance with the judge's order and thus was not aggrieved. The WCAB also noted SCIF's petition lacked reasonable justification and could be subject to sanctions.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for RemovalUnverified PetitionWCJ OrderDocumentary EvidenceDeath Without Dependents UnitIn Camera ReviewPrivileged DocumentsWork ProductSanctions
References
Showing 1-10 of 713 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