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. ADJ7050875
Regular
Dec 08, 2011

ROBERT DOI vs. CITY OF TULARE, Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final interlocutory order, not a substantive decision. The Board also denied removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse final decision issues. Furthermore, the applicant's medical opinion was disregarded as it was based on an incorrect legal theory regarding employment stress and heart disease. Consequently, both the petition for reconsideration and the request for removal were denied.

Petition for reconsiderationFinal orderSubstantive rightLiabilityInterlocutory orderNon-final interlocutory ordersRemovalWCJ's Report and RecommendationSubstantial prejudiceIrreparable harm
References
Case No. ADJ6760646
Regular

MIGUEL INIGUEZ vs. CROP PRODUCTION SERVICES, ESIS

This order dismisses a Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The Board found the challenged orders to be interlocutory and procedural. Furthermore, the petition for removal was denied as the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, both reconsideration and removal were refused.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory Procedural DecisionsEvidentiary DecisionsNon-final Interlocutory OrdersPetition for RemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ2311576
Regular
Nov 13, 2012

JOANNE GARCIA vs. THE HOME DEPOT USA, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Home Depot's petition for reconsideration because it was based on an interlocutory order, not a final decision. Reconsideration is only permissible for final orders that determine substantive rights and liabilities. Pre-trial orders concerning evidence or trial settings are considered interlocutory and thus not subject to reconsideration. The WCAB also noted that the lien claimant was not aggrieved.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightsLiabilitiesWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code Section 5900Aggrieved Party
References
Case No. ADJ7111052
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

MARTHA BURTON vs. PARADISE BAKERS & CAFÉ, INC., TRAVELERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Martha Burton's Petition for Reconsideration. The WCAB determined that reconsideration can only be sought for final orders, not interlocutory procedural orders. Burton challenged a Notice of Intention (NIT) Re: Sanctions, which the WCAB classified as an interlocutory order that does not resolve substantive rights or liabilities. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as it was not a final order subject to reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightsLiabilitiesAdministrative Law JudgePre-trial OrdersNotice of Intention
References
Case No. ADJ4432553
Regular
May 06, 2014

MARTIN ZAVALA vs. COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHCARE PARTNERS, QBC, DAVID BERNS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by Martin Zavala. The WCAB clarified that reconsideration can only be sought for final orders that determine substantive rights or liabilities. Interlocutory procedural orders, such as those concerning evidence, discovery, or trial settings, are not final orders and therefore not subject to reconsideration. Consequently, Zavala's petition, likely challenging such an interlocutory order, was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial OrdersEvidenceDiscoveryVenueWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ8081723
Regular
Apr 29, 2014

BEATRIZ DELGADO vs. INDUSPAC CALIFORNIA, INC./WESTERN FOAM PACKING PRODUCTS, PINNACLE

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Applicant Beatriz Delgado. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition. The WCAB reasoned that reconsideration can only be sought for final orders that determine substantive rights or liabilities, not for interlocutory procedural orders. Pre-trial orders regarding evidence, discovery, trial setting, or venue are considered interlocutory and therefore not subject to reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial OrdersEvidenceDiscoverySetting for Trial
References
Case No. ADJ9237152
Regular
Aug 19, 2014

MIRNA ROBLES vs. RUSSAKS CURED AND SMOKED PRODUCTS, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed within the statutory 25-day period after the Order Approving Compromise and Release. The Board also dismissed the Petition for Removal, finding it untimely and lacking grounds for removal as the judge's order was interlocutory and did not cause irreparable harm. Interlocutory procedural orders are not subject to reconsideration or removal as they do not determine substantive rights or liabilities.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightIrreparable HarmTimely-FiledOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseWCJVan Nuys District Office
References
Case No. ADJ8433569
Regular
Jan 28, 2015

MICHAEL KATZ vs. CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Applicant's petition for reconsideration. This dismissal was based on the principle that reconsideration can only be sought for final orders, not interlocutory procedural rulings. The WCAB clarified that pre-trial orders concerning evidence, discovery, trial scheduling, or venue are considered interlocutory and do not determine substantive rights. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as it was not filed in response to a final, appealable decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityWCJAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPre-trial Order
References
Case No. ADJ4173320(VNO 0386574)
Regular
Nov 18, 2019

RENEE SOTILE vs. KTLA, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by BROADSPE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Renee Sotile's Petition for Reconsideration. This dismissal was based on the fact that reconsideration can only be granted for final orders, decisions, or awards, not interlocutory procedural orders. Pre-trial orders concerning evidence, discovery, trial setting, or venue are considered interlocutory and do not determine substantive rights or liabilities. Therefore, the Board found Sotile's petition was improperly filed and dismissed it.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityWCJAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 5900
References
Case No. SAU10030321
Regular
Oct 08, 2019

BRIAN DUARTE vs. ALL ABOUT PAINT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Brian Duarte's petition for reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order, decision, or award. A final order must determine a substantive right or liability, or a fundamental threshold issue, not interlocutory procedural or evidentiary matters. The WCJ's order consolidating cases, designating a master file, staying liens, and noticing a hearing was deemed an interlocutory procedural order and therefore not subject to reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionOrder of ConsolidationDesignation of Master File
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,040 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