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. ADJ7505380
Regular
Dec 31, 2013

MARIA ARANGURE vs. SUDA, INC.; THE HARTFORD

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a Petition for Removal and denied a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Landmark Medical Management on behalf of lien claimant MedRx Funding. MedRx Funding was sanctioned by the WCJ for failing to pay a lien activation fee, filing a Declaration of Readiness prematurely while the underlying case was unresolved, and filing a false declaration under penalty of perjury. While an injunction temporarily impacted the sanction for the activation fee, the Board found the other actions egregious enough to uphold the sanctions. The Board clarified that the proper procedural remedy for the sanctions order was reconsideration, not removal.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLien ClaimantLandmark Medical ManagementMedRx FundingLabor Code Section 5813Labor Code Section 4903.06Declaration of Readiness to Proceed
References
Case No. ADJ9248422, ADJ9247183
Regular
Sep 12, 2019

VERONICA VASQUEZ vs. EAST COAST FOODS, dba ROSCOE'S HOUSE OF CHICKEN AND WAFFLES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the validity of liens filed by medical providers and interpreters. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior order, finding that the declarations supporting the liens were invalid because the declarant, Ilona Kulikova, lacked personal knowledge. The Board dismissed one lien completely due to the lack of any other valid declaration. However, for two other liens, the Board remanded the case to allow the trial judge to reconsider additional declarations that were not initially evaluated.

Labor Code section 4903.8DeclarationPersonal knowledgeCompetent to testifyElectronic signatureLien claimantsAmended declarationsDue processJoint Findings and OrderPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ10678864
Regular
Aug 08, 2025

ALEX CASTILLO MASIS vs. EAST BAY FOODS INC, EMPLOYERS ASSURANCE SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed a Petition for Disqualification filed against a Workers' Compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The petition alleged grounds for disqualification under Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641, citing an unqualified opinion or bias. Upon review of the record and the WCJ's report, the Board found the petition lacked sufficient factual allegations, declared under penalty of perjury, to establish disqualification. Although the WCJ suggested sanctions for false statements by applicant's attorney, the Board declined to impose them but admonished the attorney for not being candid and truthful. Therefore, the Petition for Disqualification was denied.

Petition for DisqualificationLabor Code Section 5311Code of Civil Procedure Section 641WCAB Rule 10960Judicial BiasPrejudgmentWCJ ReportSanctionsRule 10421False Declarations
References
Case No. ADJ6880011
Regular
Dec 28, 2012

LUIS VASQUEZ vs. EMPIRE PERSONNEL, CLAIMQUEST, INC.

This case involves lien claimant Med-Legal, Inc. seeking reconsideration of a $750 sanction order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, upholding the administrative law judge's finding. The sanctions were imposed due to Med-Legal's pattern of filing Declarations of Readiness to Proceed in multiple cases and then withdrawing them without explanation, thereby wasting judicial resources. The WCAB agreed that this conduct constituted false representation and was sanctionable, affirming the penalty in the Vasquez case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsLien ClaimantDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedReconsiderationWCJJudicial ResourcesFalse RepresentationPenalty of PerjuryGood Cause Response
References
Case No. ADJ9835949; ADJ9835948; ADJ9860843
Regular
Sep 29, 2025

EDGAR ARAGON-ZARATE vs. MODERN AUTO CENTER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Lien claimant Joyce Altman Interpreting sought reconsideration of a Joint Findings and Order issued by a WCJ, which dismissed their lien for interpreting services due to alleged false or inaccurate information in their declaration under Labor Code section 4903.05(c). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the F&O, noting ambiguity in the record regarding whether the defendant denied all liability at the time the interpreting services were rendered. The WCAB emphasized that interpreting services are an integral part of medical treatment and returned the matter for further proceedings to develop the record.

Labor Code section 4903.05(c)Lien claimant declarationInterpreting services lienMedical treatment expensesDeclaration accuracyDue processExcusable neglectRescind OrderReturn to trial levelWCAB
References
Case No. ADJ8182087
Regular
Jan 18, 2018

Darin Day vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision allowing a medical lien by VQ Orthocare against the City of Los Angeles. The Board found VQ's lien was valid despite late filing of a required declaration, as the lien was filed before the relevant statute's effective date. Defendant's arguments regarding the timeliness and form of the declaration were rejected, with the Board noting compliance with procedural rules for electronic filing and declarations under penalty of perjury. The lien was thus permitted to proceed on its merits.

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)Declaration requirementLien validityStatute of limitationsReconsiderationFindings and OrderMedical treatment lienSB 863SB 1160Declaration of readiness
References
Case No. ADJ3425275 (VNO0499477)
Regular
Oct 18, 2018

KAREN JACOBSEN vs. KRISTIN MULHALL, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by AIG

This case concerns a medical treatment lien filed before January 1, 2013, by the Long Beach Pain Center. The defendant argued the lien should be dismissed for failure to timely file a sworn declaration under Labor Code section 4903.8(d) and for alleged ownership by a "suspended provider." The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding the declaration defect curable and the defendant failed to prove ownership/control under section 139.21. However, the Board noted the untimeliness of the declaration and directed the WCJ to consider sanctions.

RemittiturPetition for Writ of ReviewPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Findings of Fact and OrdersLien ClaimantMedical Treatment LienLabor Code Section 4903.8(d)Sworn DeclarationDismissed by Operation of LawLabor Code Section 139.21
References
Case No. ADJ8324040
Regular
Mar 15, 2019

ISAIAS GARCIA vs. CERADYNE, INC.; XL INSURANCE c/o SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to lien claimants Technical Surgical Support and Comprehensive Outpatient Surgery Center. The WCJ had disallowed their liens because their Labor Code section 4903.8(d) declarations were filed untimely and not considered part of the record. The Board found that while the declarations were indeed filed late, the liens themselves were filed before January 1, 2013, predating a stricter WCAB rule. The Board rescinded the WCJ's order, returning the case for further proceedings to allow the defendant to examine the declarant and for a merits-based consideration of the liens.

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)lien claimantsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJDeclaration of Readinesslien hearinguntimely declarationWCAB Rule 10770(c)(8)Mendoza v. Oak Grove
References
Case No. ADJ7580462; ADJ7580463; ADJ8813744
Regular
Mar 11, 2025

DORINA CORNEJO vs. SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

Lien claimant Supreme Copy Service, Inc., sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge's (WCJ) findings regarding its withdrawn lien and sanctionable conduct. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the petition for reconsideration, rescinding the previous findings. The Board determined that the lien was dismissed by operation of law on July 3, 2017, due to the lien claimant's failure to file a required declaration under Labor Code section 4903.05. Consequently, the defendant's petition for sanctions was rendered moot, as the WCAB no longer had jurisdiction over the dismissed lien.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactSanctionable ConductLabor Code Section 4903.05Dismissal by Operation of LawDeclaration Pursuant to Labor Code Section 4903.8Declaration Pursuant to Labor Code Section 4903.05(c)(3)Electronic Adjudication Management System
References
Case No. ADJ9584373
Regular
Apr 23, 2018

FRITCHJOFF GILBERTSON vs. BIG 5 CORPORATION, CORVEL CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, finding the WCJ erred in placing the burden of proof on the lien claimant. The WCAB granted removal on its own motion, rescinded the WCJ's findings, and returned the case to the trial level. The Board concluded that a declaration made under penalty of perjury is prima facie evidence, and the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving the declaration false. Therefore, the case requires further proceedings to address other lien claim issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and NoticeLabor Code Section 4903.05(c)DeclarationIndependent Bill Review (IBR)Medical Provider Network (MPN)WCJ
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,202 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