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. ADJ11008178
Regular
Oct 09, 2020

JAMIE BODINE vs. EMPLOYER SOLUTIONS STAFFING GROUP II, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision awarding continuing temporary disability benefits to the applicant. The defendant argued that proceeding to trial on the issue of temporary disability violated its due process rights due to insufficient notice. The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board found that the defendant was not provided with proper notice regarding the temporary disability issue, thus violating its due process rights.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardTemporary DisabilityDue ProcessExpedited HearingDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedMedical TreatmentWork RestrictionsAccommodation
References
Case No. ADJ1660426 (FRE 0225153)
Regular
Jul 19, 2012

Barbara Haskin vs. Fresno Unified School District

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration for lien claimant Access Mediquip against Fresno Unified School District. The WCJ had previously ruled that the lien claimant take nothing, finding the defendant had no obligation to them. However, the Appeals Board found the record deficient, lacking admitted evidence necessary for a fair adjudication. Consequently, the prior decision was rescinded, and the case was returned for further proceedings and a new decision.

Access MediquipPinnacle Lien Servicesspinal surgeryimplantable devicesSynthes invoiceadmitted evidenceevidentiary recordFileNetEAMSHamilton v. Lockheed
References
Case No. ADJ7532505
Regular
Nov 01, 2011

EVANGELINA JUAREZ vs. PROFESSIONAL HOSPITAL SUPPLY, INC., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

This case involves an applicant seeking workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained on March 18, 2009. The primary issue is whether the claim is barred by the statute of limitations under Labor Code section 5405. The applicant's claim was denied by the defendant on June 15, 2009, and the subsequent application for adjudication was filed on November 15, 2010. The Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that the claim was not timely filed. The applicant's argument that the defendant failed to prove she had actual knowledge of the denial was unpersuasive given the documented denial and the lack of evidence of timely filing.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatute of LimitationsLabor Code section 5405ReconsiderationApplication for Adjudication of ClaimDenial of ClaimActual KnowledgeBurden of ProofMedical TreatmentWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ4581305
Regular
Sep 20, 2011

ROBERTO ESQUIVEL vs. ALBERTSON'S, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought removal of the WCJ's order setting a lien trial, alleging due process violations and irreparable harm due to the denial of a continuance. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the trial order, and returned the matter to the trial level. This decision acknowledges disputed factual and legal issues regarding the lien claimant's lien that were not adequately addressed. The Board expects improved conduct from parties in future proceedings.

Petition for RemovalLien TrialDue ProcessIrreparable HarmCompromise and ReleaseLien ClaimantTimelinessFileNetAppeals BoardWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ1931124
Regular
Mar 15, 2013

ROCHELLE HAMILTON vs. MED SHORES HOME CARE, SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claimant. The dismissal was based on the lien claimant's failure to submit proof of payment for a $100 activation fee at a lien conference, as required by Labor Code section 4903.06(a)(4). While the lien conference was rescheduled due to administrative reasons, the WCAB found that the statute strictly prohibits granting additional time to pay the activation fee. Lien claimants are responsible for familiarizing themselves with applicable statutes and regulations to avoid such dismissals.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4903.06AD Emergency Rule 10208lien conferenceactivation feedismissal with prejudicelien claimantWCJ reportstatutory prohibition
References
Case No. ADJ726748 (AHM 0090482) ADJ8296550
Regular
Jan 15, 2014

JOYCE HECTOR vs. JVC OF AMERICA, LIBERTY MUTUAL

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a dismissal order based on failure to pay a lien activation fee. Due to a federal court injunction against enforcing these fees, the Appeals Board rescinded the dismissal and returned the matter for further proceedings. The Board also noted significant misrepresentations by the lien claimant regarding filing a lien and receiving notice, cautioning them against sanctionable conduct. The decision emphasizes the importance of truthful representations to the tribunal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06(a)(4)Preliminary InjunctionAngelotti Chiropractic v. Christine BakerRescinded OrderFileNetElectronic Adjudication Management SystemMisrepresentation of Facts
References
Case No. ADJ4565216 (MON 0357743)
Regular
Jun 25, 2012

JENNIFER GONZALEZ vs. YUM YUM DONUT SHOPS, INC., STATE FARM CALIFORNIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

This case involves a Petition for Removal and Reconsideration filed by a lien claimant and deponents. They sought sanctions against the defendant for alleged misrepresentations and improper legal citations in discovery requests. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed both petitions. This was because the petitions were filed 85 days after the administrative law judge's decision, significantly exceeding the 20-day deadline plus 5 days for mail service. The Board lacked jurisdiction to consider the untimely filings.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWCJLien ClaimantSanctionsCostsDiscoveryMotion to CompelFindings of FactProof of Service
References
Case No. ADJ2255696 (VNO 0497652)
Regular
May 15, 2009

TATIANA ZAKIANS vs. BLOOMINGDALES

Lien claimant Sam Alaiti, M.D., sought reconsideration of a WCJ's order reducing his lien by over $80\%$. The WCJ recommended granting reconsideration, noting procedural issues with the petition's timely attention by the judge. The Appeals Board found the petition timely filed, but it did not come to their attention until after the statutory reconsideration period had passed. Citing due process principles, the Board held the reconsideration period begins upon their actual notice. Therefore, the Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Reducing LienOrder to Pay Lienworkers' compensation administrative law judgeEAMSFileNetstatutory time periodAppeals Boarddue process
References
Case No. ADJ6664260
Regular
Dec 15, 2014

RODOLFO DE LA TORRE vs. DESIGNED METAL CONNECTIONS, TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a dismissal order that had removed lien claimant Frontline Medical Associates' lien. Frontline claimed it filed a timely objection to the notice of intention to dismiss, but this objection was not recorded in the system. The Board found that the WCJ's failure to consider Frontline's objection may have violated due process. Therefore, the dismissal order was rescinded, and the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine the timeliness of the objection and its merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantDismissal OrderNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienDue ProcessCompromise and ReleaseLien TrialFileNetElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
Case No. ADJ6617683
Regular
Nov 03, 2011

SAMMY BRAN vs. ENTERTAINMENT PARTNERS, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE c/o CHARTIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Defendant Warner Brothers' Petition for Removal. Warner Brothers sought to rescind an Order of Joinder and dismiss a Petition for Contribution, arguing the contribution petition was untimely. The WCJ found Warner Brothers failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and that their petition was based on an incorrect assumption about the filing date. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's report and admonished Warner Brothers' counsel for filing a potentially frivolous petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalPetition for RemovalOrder of JoinderPetition for ContributionUntimelyIrreparable InjuryLabor Code §5310Swedlow Inc. v. WCAB (Smith)EAMS/FileNet
References
Showing 1-10 of 12 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