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. ADJ9925486
Regular
Jun 10, 2016

ALEJANDRO OJEDA CHAVEZ vs. CONCO COMPANIES, ZURICH INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final, interlocutory order. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found the order did not determine substantive rights, liabilities, or a threshold issue. The petition for removal was also denied, as the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCAB stressed that petitions for reconsideration are for final decisions, while removal is the avenue for challenging interim orders.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsideration Adequate Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ7162659
Regular
Nov 07, 2013

,JUAN MORA, vs. ,CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL and ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT; CALIFORNIA COMFORT VANS, and AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA, ACE FIRE UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY/ACE GROUP, et. al.,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because the challenged order was procedural and not a final determination of substantive rights. The WCAB found that an interim order striking a doctor's opinion due to ex parte communication is not subject to reconsideration under Labor Code Section 5900(a). The case was returned to the trial level for clarification of the original order, specifically whether all of the doctor's reports were stricken and if the doctor was dismissed as the Qualified Medical Examiner. This clarification is necessary for proper further proceedings and potential issuance of a replacement QME panel.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONORDER STRIKINGEX PARTE COMMUNICATIONQUALIFIED MEDICAL EXAMINER (QME)LABOR CODE SECTION 4062.3FINAL ORDERINTERIM PROCEDURAL ORDERSDISCOVERYEVIDENTIARY MATTERS
References
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. ADJ6473659, ADJ6680091
Regular
Jan 27, 2014

LEANDRO GARCIA vs. CABRILLO CARE CENTER, CAREWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claimant's attempt to appeal an administrative law judge's (WCJ) order rescinding a prior lien allowance. The Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petition, finding the rescission order to be interim and not a final order subject to reconsideration. The Board also denied the petition for removal, concluding that the WCJ acted correctly in rescinding the lien allowance due to service issues and conflicting timelines. Ultimately, the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings on the lien claim's merits.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Rescinding Order Allowing LienCompromise and ReleaseLabor Code section 5900(a)final orderinterim ordersAppeals Board Rule 10859WCJ
References
Case No. ADJ3220762 (ANA 0379828)
Regular
Dec 22, 2008

MARIA REYES vs. WESTERN MEMORIAL SERVICE CORP., ZENITH WOODLAND HILLS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed from an interim discovery order, not a final decision, which is not subject to reconsideration under Labor Code § 5900. Even if considered a petition for removal or disqualification, the Board would deny it on the merits. Furthermore, the petition was dismissed for failure to include a required proof of service.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationMotion to QuashSubpoena Duces TecumPrimary Treating PhysicianIndustrial InjuryFinal OrderInterim OrdersDiscovery OrdersPetition for Removal
References
Case No. ADJ8050106 ADJ9468937 ADJ9154032
Regular
Nov 03, 2018

ANTONIO VAZQUEZ vs. CARSON TRAILERS, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was taken from an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision. The Board also denied the petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if a final decision issues. The order pertains to multiple cases involving Antonio Vazquez and Carson Trailers. The WCJ's order directing the use of a specific bill reviewer was deemed an evidentiary/procedural matter.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderEvidentiary OrderProcedural OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ119309 (OAK 0332713) ADJ1352097 (OAK 332714)
Regular
Aug 09, 2011

KEN LAWHN vs. FARMERS INSURANCE, HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's order compelling a neuropsychological evaluation. The Board determined the WCJ's order was an interim discovery ruling, not a final decision on substantive rights, making it ineligible for reconsideration. The applicant's petition for removal was also denied, adopting the WCJ's reasoning for the original order. The applicant had argued the evaluation was an invasion of privacy and unnecessary as neuropsychological health was not at issue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNeuropsychological QME evaluationNon-industrial closed head injuryOpen labor marketPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and OrderDiscovery orderInterim orderSubstantive rights
References
Case No. ADJ2575467 (MON 0279936) ADJ3728924 (MON 0279935) ADJ718276 (MON 0279934) ADJ2027609 (MON 0279937) ADJ416188 (MON 0328847)
Regular
Aug 16, 2016

LONDY ZOMETA vs. YOUNGER MANUFACTURING, AKA YOUNGER OPTICS; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION For COMMERCIAL COMPENSATION CASUALTY, In Liquidation, By TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of an order vacating a prior payment authorization. The Board dismissed the petition because the order in question was an interim procedural order, not a final determination of rights. While the claimant argued CIGA's initial petition was untimely, the Board found it was filed within the permissible window. The Board also noted that even if treated as a removal petition, it would be denied due to a lack of demonstrated irreparable harm.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCIGAPetition for ReconsiderationAmended OrderLien ClaimantAquatic RehabHands Only OTAssignment of Accounts ReceivableNot a CIGA Covered ClaimInsurance Code Section 1063.1(c)(9)(b)
References
Case No. ADJ9671520
Regular
Oct 18, 2019

ALICIA DAVENPORT vs. NORDSTROM, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Nordstrom's Petition for Reconsideration, finding the WCJ's order to take the case off calendar was not a final order. However, the WCAB granted Nordstrom's Petition for Removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and returned the matter for further proceedings. This action was taken because the WCJ failed to adequately address the parties' Compromise and Release agreement, specifically concerning defendant's credit for $3,500 in missed appointment fees. The WCAB indicated the parties could bifurcate the settlement or the issue of the fees would require a hearing.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardNordstromInc.Alicia DavenportPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalCompromise and Releasemissed appointment feesadministrative law judgeOrder Suspending Action
References
Case No. ADJ1644999 (LAO0880435)
Regular
Dec 11, 2012

, MANUEL FERNIZA, vs. , RENT A CENTER, INC.; FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY/ASSOCIATED INDEMNITY,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the applicant's petition. The WCAB determined that the applicant's petition sought reconsideration of an interim procedural order, not a final decision, which is not appealable. Even if the merits were considered, the WCAB would have affirmed the judge's decision, finding the QME report timely and deferring a decision on treatment authorization until a PQME urological report was issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFinal OrderInterim OrdersPanel Qualified Medical ExaminerMedical Provider NetworkUrological ConditionIndustrial InjuryAdministrative DirectorWCJ Report
References
Showing 1-10 of 8,616 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