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. 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. ADJ8339009
Regular
Jan 08, 2016

WINSTON ROCKEFELLER (Dec'd), SUZANNA ROCKEFELLER (Dependent), ERIKA OSWALD (Dependent) vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS NORTHERN TRANSPORTATION HUBQ-ADMINISTRATION; legally uninsured; administered by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board intends to rescind its prior order granting reconsideration and dismiss the applicant's petition as moot. This action is prompted by the defendant's assertion that a new Panel Qualified Medical Examiner has been appointed and has issued reports, rendering the original dispute regarding the disqualification of the previous PQME moot. The Board will proceed with rescinding and dismissing unless the applicant demonstrates good cause why the issue remains live. No decision on the merits of the original petition has been made.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderPanel Qualified Medical ExaminerPQMERule 41.5(d)(2)(A)disqualifying conflict of interestmoot issueNotice of Moot IssueOpinion and Order Granting Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ7744557
Regular
Feb 06, 2017

THOMAS RICHARD GUTZWILLER vs. RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case concerns a defendant's petition for removal to prevent a deposition of their claims examiner regarding medical treatment issues. The defendant argued substantial prejudice and irreparable harm due to expense, mootness, and impact on the examiner's time, also alleging bad faith discovery tactics. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied removal, emphasizing it is an extraordinary remedy. The Board found the defendant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, or that reconsideration would be inadequate.

Petition for RemovalDepositionMedical Treatment IssuesSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmMoot IssueBad Faith DiscoverySettlement DemandsWCJ ReportExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. SAU8813471
Regular
Feb 07, 2023

KIMBERLY KENNEY vs. SEGUOYAH, INC., FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for removal of an order consolidating liens and imposing a temporary stay. The consolidation aims to resolve a common legal issue regarding whether the lien claimant is controlled by a criminally charged physician, which would trigger an automatic stay under Labor Code section 4615. The Board found no due process violation, as the order only stays other lien issues pending the common issue's adjudication. Furthermore, the consolidation serves judicial efficiency by avoiding duplicate rulings on this critical threshold matter.

WCABPetition for RemovalOrder of Consolidation and StayLien ClaimantLabor Code section 4615Due ProcessIssue PreclusionConsolidation OrderWCJFarmers Insurance Exchange
References
Case No. ADJ9709184
Regular
Mar 12, 2025

JOHN GUY vs. AV DECKING, AIG CLAIMS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered a Petition for Disqualification against a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The petition alleged grounds for disqualification based on an unqualified opinion or bias. After reviewing the WCJ's report, the Board determined that the petition did not provide sufficient facts under penalty of perjury to establish the grounds for disqualification as per Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641. Additionally, a Compromise and Release had been approved, rendering the petition moot. Consequently, the Petition for Disqualification was denied by the Board.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJLabor Code 5311Code of Civil Procedure 641affidavitdeclarationprejudicebiasunqualified opinionevidence
References
Case No. ADJ8620013, ADJ10761228
Regular
Jun 08, 2017

MARK EBERWEIN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order. The WCAB further denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from denial. The WCJ's decision addressed an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue, not a substantive right or threshold issue. Therefore, neither reconsideration nor removal was deemed appropriate at this stage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ10652805
Regular
Nov 16, 2018

JESUS ARELLANO vs. RJP FRAMING, INC.; REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration because it was taken from a non-final interlocutory order. The order at issue, which closed discovery, did not determine substantive rights, liabilities, or a threshold issue fundamental to the claim. Therefore, it was not a final order as required for reconsideration under Labor Code sections 5900(a), 5902, and 5903. The Board also found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if the petition were treated as a request for removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueRemoval
References
Case No. ADJ8162003
Regular
Dec 17, 2014

MARIA GUIZAR vs. CROWN PLAZA HOTEL, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY, PATRIOT RISK SERVICES

Defendant sought removal, arguing a trial date was set prematurely before a mandatory settlement conference. The Board reviewed the case and found the petition moot because the parties appeared for trial on the scheduled date and jointly requested the case be taken off calendar. The trial judge also effectively nullified the prior order the defendant objected to. Therefore, the Petition for Removal was dismissed as the issues raised were resolved.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceOrder Vacating JoinderWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMootStatus ConferenceTrial DateDiscoveryStipulations
References
Case No. ADJ11991353
Regular
Mar 30, 2020

TEOFILA DICKERSON vs. ALBERTSONS HOLDINGS

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding it moot. While the WCJ erred by not addressing the medical treatment issue at the expedited hearing, a subsequent Findings and Award was issued without challenge. This award determined temporary disability, rendering the prior dispute regarding treatment resolution moot for now. The Board advises filing a new DOR if disputes arise, as the WCJ must address all issues presented.

Petition for RemovalPrimary Treating PhysicianExpedited HearingMedical TreatmentFindings and AwardTemporary DisabilityDeclaration of Readiness to Proceed (DOR)MootLabor Code section 5313Appeals Board en banc
References
Case No. ADJ4152685
Regular
Oct 23, 2013

FLORIDA SILVA vs. RIOS FARM LABOR SERVICES, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Florida Silva's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the denial of her claim for attorney's fees and penalties. The denial stemmed from the applicant's failure to formally petition for penalties or raise attorney's fees and costs as issues during the Mandatory Settlement Conference or trial. The board found that the SJDB voucher issue became moot when it was eventually provided, and without a formal petition for penalties, there was no basis for an award of fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Displacement Job BenefitSJDB voucherunreasonable delayLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyRios Farm Labor ServicesLabor Code section 5814.5attorney's feespenalties
References
Showing 1-10 of 5,107 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