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. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. ADJ2023756 (SAC 0323234)
Regular
Aug 30, 2013

VICTORIA BRESHEARS vs. THE KROGER COMPANY DBA RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the employer's Petition for Reconsideration due to discrepancies regarding the timeliness of its filing. The Board issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss, requiring the employer to provide proof of timely electronic filing via EAMS, specifically the Batch ID and submission date/time. If the employer fails to demonstrate the petition was filed before 5:00 PM on July 8, 2013, it will be dismissed as untimely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardFindings and OrderWCJEAMSElectronic Adjudication Management SystemBatch IDTimely FiledProof of Service
References
Case No. ADJ7124599
Regular
Apr 30, 2013

FUENTES vs. CEDARLANE NATURAL, LIBERTY MUTUAL

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a dismissed lien. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the Judge's reasoning that the lien claimant failed to provide proof of timely payment of the lien activation fee. The Judge noted that the claimant did not present a receipt showing timely payment even when given an extended opportunity. Furthermore, the claimant failed to attach proof of timely payment of the lien activation fee to their petition, a requirement for reconsideration.

ADJ7124599Petition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantWCJ OpinionReport and RecommendationFigueroa v. B.C. Doering Co.Lien Activation FeeDismissalLien ConferenceMinutes of Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ7472541
Regular
Sep 02, 2014

MIRNA REYES vs. PREMIER BUILDING MAINTENANCE SERVICES, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case involves a petition for reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The dismissal was primarily based on the petition not being timely-filed, as the applicant's representative received personal service of the underlying order. Even if the petition had been considered timely, the Board indicated it would have been denied on the merits. Consequently, the Board formally ordered the dismissal of the petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionTimely-filedPersonal ServiceOrder Dismissing LienWCJ Report20-day time limitService by mailMeritsWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ9981379 ADJ10049541
Regular
Oct 08, 2020

ULISES AVILA vs. LARRY GONZALES dba LARRY GONZALES FARM LABOR, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board reversed a WCJ's finding that a lien claimant's services ended on March 16, 2015, determining instead that services extended to June 8, 2015. This decision makes the lien timely filed under Labor Code section 4903.5(a). The Board affirmed the WCJ's orders except to find the lien timely filed and to defer the lien's allowance. The matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the Board's decision and to assess the lien under the framework of *Colamonico*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantStatute of LimitationsSubpoena Duces TecumMedical-Legal ServicesReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersLabor Code Section 4903.5(a)Timely FiledDeferred Issue
References
Case No. ADJ8964113
Regular
Jun 24, 2016

LISA LIU vs. ADVENTURER HOTEL, TOWER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claim filed by Tri-County Medical Group for services provided to applicant Lisa Liu. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) dismissed the lien, finding it was filed untimely beyond the 18-month statutory limit. The lien claimant appealed, arguing the filing date of February 2, 2015, was within the period because the 18-month deadline of February 1, 2015, fell on a Sunday, extending the filing to the next business day. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the ALJ's order, and found the lien timely filed. The Board determined that per procedural rules, when the last day falls on a weekend, the deadline extends to the next business day.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4903.5(b)Statute of Limitations18-month periodRules of Practice and ProcedureBusiness DayEAMS RecordJudicial Notice
References
Case No. OXN 0132944
Regular
May 23, 2008

ALEJANDRA ORNELAS vs. ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, ALASKA NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Anderson Chiropractic's petition for reconsideration because it was filed late, exceeding the 25-day statutory limit after the initial award. The lien claimant sought reconsideration of a previous decision that allowed only a portion of their claimed medical expenses for the applicant's industrial injury. Even if timely, the petition would have been denied on its merits based on the judge's report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderAdministrative Law JudgeCompromise and ReleaseJurisdictionLabor CodeTimelinessProof of Service
References
Case No. ADJ2826285
Regular
Feb 18, 2016

RAUL GARCIA vs. HAGI ASSOCIATES, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a Petition for Removal filed by the defendants, Hagi Associates and Employers Compensation Insurance Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition as untimely. The WCAB ruled that the petition was filed more than 25 days after the WCJ's decision, exceeding the statutory filing deadline. Furthermore, the WCAB noted that proof of mailing is insufficient; the petition must be *received* by the WCAB within the time limit.

Petition for RemovalTimelinessDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ DecisionService by MailFiling DeadlineExtended TimeBusiness DayProof of Mailing
References
Case No. ADJ8759866
Regular
Sep 01, 2016

ERNESTINA ESCAMILLA vs. PELICAN PRODUCTS, INC., UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case addresses a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a denied lien. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, affirming the administrative law judge's finding that the lien was barred by Labor Code section 4903.5(a)'s 18-month limitations period. The Board ruled that because services were provided after July 1, 2013, the lien claimant was obligated to file within 18 months of the last service date, which they failed to do. The Board reasoned that the statute provided reasonable time for filing after its enactment.

Labor Code section 4903.5(a)lien claimantreconsideration18-month limitation periodJuly 12013reasonable timeretroactive applicationproceduralvocational rehabilitation
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,760 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