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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Omaha Indemnity Co. v. Whaleneck Harbor Marina, Inc.

This case concerns an action for negligence, breach of contract, and trespass brought by Omaha Indemnity Co., as subrogee, and intervenor Sea Treats Unlimited against unnamed defendants. The dispute arose after Sea Treats' yacht, the S/V Sea Roar, was damaged while in dry storage at the defendants' boatyard in Nassau County in March 1983. Omaha paid Sea Treats for the damage and then commenced this action. The central issue was whether the court had admiralty jurisdiction over the claims, particularly given that the damage occurred on land. The defendants moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing the tort claims lacked a maritime connection and the contract was solely for storage. However, the court denied the motion, ruling that contracts for winter storage of vessels intended for future navigation fall within admiralty jurisdiction, even without repair provisions, and exercised ancillary jurisdiction over the related tort claims.

Admiralty LawMaritime TortBreach of ContractTrespassSubject Matter JurisdictionWinter StorageYacht DamageNavigable WatersAncillary JurisdictionFederal Rules of Civil Procedure
References
10
Case No. ADJ3415468 (AHM 0146168)
Regular
Feb 05, 2013

ZOBEIDA ALVA vs. OXFORD VILLA, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal and imposed a $750 sanction on lien claimant SAI Professional Services and its representative, Betty Rezmer, for filing a frivolous Petition for Reconsideration. The Board found the petition contained willful misrepresentations of the record and disregarded evidence that contradicted the lien claimant's claims. After failing to respond to the Board's notice of intent to sanction, the $750 penalty is now officially assessed and must be paid to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Rule 10561Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFrivolous ActionWillful MisrepresentationsFailure to Appear
References
0
Case No. ADJ6711975
Regular
Aug 05, 2013

DIONICIO REYES vs. FILOMENA D'AMORE, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition to vacate an order dismissing their lien for failure to pay an activation fee. The petition was untimely, filed 59 days after the order was served. The Board also granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions due to the petition's untimeliness and multiple misrepresentations of fact. The Board is considering imposing a $500 sanction against the lien claimant's representative.

Lien ClaimantPetition to Vacate OrderLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Untimely PetitionRemoval on Own MotionNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Misrepresented Material FactsWCAB Rule 10842(a)
References
0
Case No. ADJ3362095 (RIV 0081256)
Regular
Sep 12, 2011

RAMON CAMACHO vs. BROWN DATES GARDEN, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

This case concerns defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order allowing a lien claim. The defendant argued inadequate notice of the lien trial and the subsequent order, and that the order was based on a repealed regulation. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, noting the late discovery of the petition but applying due process principles for the reconsideration timeline. The Board rescinded the original order and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Allowing Lien ClaimPrime Orthopedicsinadequate noticelien trialfax serviceCCP 1013(e)repealed regulationCCR Title 8 Section 10563statutory time for reconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ6766189
Regular
Jul 03, 2012

MIRNA CERRATO AGUILAR vs. BEVERLY PAVILION ASSOCIATES, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Anna Montes, a hearing representative, regarding a $1,500 sanction imposed by the WCJ. Montes was sanctioned for her "insolent, obstructive, disrespectful and frivolous" conduct during a workers' compensation trial involving her client, Dr. Anguizola. The Appeals Board denied Montes' petition, adopting the WCJ's report which detailed how her behavior caused unnecessary delay and wasted Board resources. The Board reiterated that representatives must conduct themselves professionally and ethically, adhering to rules against bad faith tactics that cause delay.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryRoom AttendantLien ClaimantMedical TreatmentPenaltyInterestInsolent Conduct
References
0
Case No. ADJ935889 (LAO 0871512)
Regular
Oct 18, 2010

OSMIN MELENDEZ vs. EXQUISITE SURFACES, VIRGINIA SURETY, FIRSTCOMP OF OMAHA

Lien claimants E&M Interpreting and Health Care Interpreting sought reconsideration after their liens were disallowed by the WCJ for failing to meet the burden of proof regarding the reasonableness and necessity of their services and fees. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the lien claimants should have an opportunity to obtain relevant medical reports. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision but amended the findings to defer the liens, remanding the case for further proceedings to allow the lien claimants to present competent evidence. This decision ensures an opportunity for the lien claimants to properly establish their claims before final disallowance.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseInterpreting ServicesBurden of ProofReasonableness and NecessityMedical DocumentationCertified InterpretersLabor Code Section 4903(b)
References
2
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
0
Case No. ADJ8500471
Regular
Mar 05, 2013

CESAR ROBLES vs. FLORES AUTO REPAIR, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA for MARKEL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the defendant, Flores Auto Repair and its insurer, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has dismissed. The dismissal is based on the petition being filed untimely, specifically more than 20 days after the initial order plus 5 days for mailing. The WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's report, which concluded the petition failed to meet the statutory deadline under Labor Code section 5903. Therefore, the WCAB ordered the petition for reconsideration dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeDismissalOrderMarkel Insurance CompanyFlores Auto Repair
References
0
Case No. ADJ6646120
Regular
Oct 12, 2012

DONACIANO SALGADO vs. 3RD DOG, INC., FIRSTCOMP OF OMAHA for SOUTHERN INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration after its lien was dismissed for failure to appear at a hearing. The dismissal stemmed from confusion caused by two sets of minutes for the same hearing date. The Board found that the lien claimant's petition was not brought to their attention within the statutory period for reconsideration, and thus the time for review began when they actually received it. Consequently, the dismissal order was rescinded, and the case was returned for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienNotice of HearingMinutes of HearingTaken Off CalendarStatutory Time for ReconsiderationDue Process
References
2
Case No. ADJ7872929
Regular
Aug 26, 2013

SAMUEL FRANCO vs. JCT COMPANY, INC.; FIRSTCOMP OMAHA, ENDURANCE SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the appealed order was not a final order. However, the WCAB granted the applicant's alternative Petition for Removal, recognizing significant prejudice to the applicant due to the inconvenience and cost of appearing at the Long Beach District Office. Consequently, the WCAB ordered the case transferred to the Van Nuys District Office for venue. The WCAB also cautioned the applicant's attorney regarding the inappropriate filing of a reconsideration petition on a non-final order.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalPetition to Change of VenueWCJCumulative Industrial InjuryDelivery DriverLower ExtremitiesBackHipHernia
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 64 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