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. SRO 0116034
Regular
Jul 05, 2007

ELENORA ROBINSON vs. RAPISTAN SYSTEMS, FIREMAN'S FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of an order vacating a trial date. This denial was based on the principle that a final adjudication of the applicant's Labor Code section 132a claim had already occurred and all subsequent appeals were exhausted. Furthermore, the Board found it lacked jurisdiction to reopen a section 132a claim due to statutory time limitations, as the petition to reopen was filed more than five years after the date of injury.

Labor Code section 132aPetition to ReopenOrder Vacating Trial DateWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boardfinal adjudicationjurisdictionarbitrarycapriciousPetition for Reconsiderationres judicata
References
Case No. ADJ7828286
Regular
Oct 09, 2013

REGINALD GERMANY vs. BUFFALO BILLS, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinding the prior decision that California lacked jurisdiction over the applicant's cumulative trauma injury claim. The WCAB found that the prior judge improperly applied personal jurisdiction principles. The case is returned for further proceedings to determine if defendants are exempt from WCAB jurisdiction under Labor Code section 3600.5(b) or if jurisdiction should be declined based on a mandatory forum selection clause and limited connection to California, as established in relevant en banc decisions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative Trauma InjuryJurisdictionProfessional Football PlayerMcKinley v. Arizona CardinalsLabor Code Section 3600.5(b)Carroll v. Cincinnati BrownsForum Selection ClauseLimited Connection to CaliforniaExtraterritorial Provisions
References
Case No. ADJ7570196
Regular
Apr 21, 2017

ERIK SPEARMAN vs. SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND, administered by THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund. The petition was dismissed because it was untimely, filed more than 25 days after the WCJ's decision. The WCAB emphasized that the filing deadline is jurisdictional and that a petition must be *received* by the Board within the allowed time. If the petition had been timely, it would have been denied on the merits.

SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUNDPetition for Reconsiderationuntimely filingjurisdictionalAppeals BoardWCJ decisiondeadlineproof of filingmailingservice
References
Case No. ADJ8847768
Regular
Aug 31, 2015

RAUL VAZQUEZ vs. THE MILLARD GROUP, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICE GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Raul Vazquez's petition for reconsideration against The Millard Group and its insurer. The Board found the petition was untimely filed, exceeding the 25-day jurisdictional deadline after the Workers' Compensation Judge's decision was served. Proof of mailing alone is insufficient; the petition must be received by the Board within the statutory period. Therefore, the Board lacked the authority to consider the merits of the petition, which would have been denied anyway based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWCAB RulesWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeService by MailProof of MailingDismissalLegal Precedent
References
Case No. ADJ7403688
Regular
Jan 12, 2016

RUFINA RODRIGUEZ vs. HOLIDAY INN, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Rufina Rodriguez's petition for reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed, exceeding the jurisdictional 25-day deadline for filing after the WCJ's July 30, 2013 order. The WCAB emphasized that a petition must be *received* by the board within the time limit, not just mailed. Therefore, the Board lacked authority to consider the merits of the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportMail ServiceTime Limit ExtensionJurisdictionalProof of MailingNotice of Decision
References
Case No. SFO 492433 SFO 490100
Regular
Aug 09, 2007

AMAL KHALEK vs. YELLOW CAB COOPERATIVE, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES (SCRMA)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The applicant sought to overturn a prior order approving a compromise and release, arguing a lack of mental competency at the time of settlement. However, the petition was filed outside the statutory time limit for reconsideration, rendering it jurisdictionally deficient.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAmal KhalekYellow Cab CooperativeSouthern California Risk Management ServicesSCRMAPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseWCJmental competenceuntimely petition
References
Case No. ADJ310227 (STK 0198911)
Regular
Apr 30, 2010

Sergio Pulido vs. Kraft Foods, ESIS

This case involves a lien claimant, National DrugWorks, seeking reconsideration of an order imposing sanctions for failure to appear at a hearing they initiated. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as untimely because it was filed 42 days after the order, exceeding the 25-day statutory limit. The Board emphasized that this time limit is jurisdictional. Consequently, the lien claimant's petition was dismissed.

WCABLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsLabor Code section 5813Declaration of Readiness to ProceedUntimely PetitionAppeal BoardJurisdictional Time LimitDismissal
References
Case No. ADJ8649645 ADJ8482658
Regular
Jun 25, 2015

ANTONIA LOPEZ vs. RELIABLE RESOURCES, JUSTMAN PACKAGING, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The dismissal was based solely on the petition being untimely filed. California law allows 25 days to file, with potential extensions, but the petition was filed significantly after the deadline. The WCAB lacks jurisdiction to consider petitions filed outside this mandatory time limit. Even if timely, the petition would have been denied on the merits.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely filingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeJurisdictional time limitDismissed petitionService by mailProof of filingMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. Hagler
References
Case No. ADJ7925897
Regular
Oct 01, 2015

LAURENTINO FAVELA vs. BLAHA CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Laurentino Favela's petition for reconsideration in the case of Favela v. Blaha Construction & Development. The petition was dismissed because it was untimely filed, exceeding the 25-day statutory deadline. The WCAB noted that proof of mailing is insufficient; the petition must be received by the WCAB within the time limit, which is jurisdictional. Had the petition been timely, it would have been denied on the merits based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeService by MailProof of MailingOctober 12015August 4
References
Case No. ADJ6516573
Regular
Apr 05, 2017

TOMI ANN HARTER vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, ARROWHEAD REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, *Harter v. County of San Bernardino*, concerns a petition for reconsideration that was dismissed. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed, exceeding the statutory 25-day limit for filing after a decision served by mail. The Board emphasized that the time limit is jurisdictional and proof of mailing is insufficient; the petition must be received within the allowed period. Therefore, the Board lacked authority to review the merits of the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ DecisionService by MailProof of FilingMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. Hagler
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,591 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