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. 2015-01-0377
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2018

Fleming, Jose v. Newly Weds Foods, Inc.

José Fleming, a 62-year-old dumper, sustained a low-back injury at Newly Weds Foods, Inc. in 2015, leading to a claim for permanent partial disability (PPD) benefits. The primary dispute involved determining the extent of PPD benefits, specifically whether to adopt the treating orthopedist Dr. Rickey Hutcheson's 2% whole-body impairment rating or Chiropractor Victor Poletajev's 11% rating. Additionally, the eligibility for a resulting PPD award after Mr. Fleming's termination from Newly Weds was contested. The Court ultimately sided with Dr. Hutcheson's assessment, finding Mr. Fleming failed to rebut the presumption of correctness of his causation opinion. Consequently, Mr. Fleming was awarded an original PPD benefit of $4,916.43, while his claim for a resulting award was denied because he was employed at a higher wage when the original compensation period expired.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityPPD BenefitsImpairment RatingLumbar StrainPre-existing ConditionCausationTreating PhysicianChiropractorTermination
References
3
Case No. ADJ1805486
Regular
Jul 01, 2010

SUZANNE SINGER vs. DISNEYLAND, DISNEY WORLD WIDE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant Suzanne Singer's petition for reconsideration because it was a successive petition. Singer sought reconsideration of a prior decision that affirmed the denial of her industrial injury claim from October 7, 2004. The Board found that Singer was not newly aggrieved by the prior decision and her only recourse was a writ of review, not another petition for reconsideration. Therefore, the Board dismissed her petition.

successive petitionpetition for reconsiderationindustrial injuryspecial missionwrit of reviewAppeals BoardWCJdeviationresume missionintoxicated
References
5
Case No. OAK 0278433 OAK 0295169 OAK 0307341 OAK 0307342 OAK 0307343 OAK 0321700
Regular
Jul 06, 2007

LATONIA PACE vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA/SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., and COUNTY OF ALAMEDA/AIG/ TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Defendant AIG concerning prior workers' compensation decisions. The Appeals Board dismissed AIG's petition because AIG was not newly aggrieved by the Board's prior order, which affirmed the original judge's decision without amendment. AIG failed to timely petition for reconsideration of the initial judge's decision, and therefore, cannot now seek review of it through this petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissedCumulative TraumaBilateral ShouldersUpper BackBilateral Upper ExtremitiesPermanent DisabilityWCJ Findings and AwardAggrieved Party
References
0
Case No. ADJ2579792
Regular
Oct 06, 2008

MARIA PEREZ vs. GUJMARRA VINEYARDS, THE TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed True MRI Medical Centers' Petition for Reconsideration because the lien claimant was not an aggrieved party, as no final order concerning their lien had been issued. The petition also failed to meet statutory requirements for alleging newly discovered evidence, lacking specific references to the record and a proper offer of proof. Consequently, the Board found the petition procedurally deficient and dismissed it accordingly.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationAggrieved PartyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJNewly Discovered EvidenceOffer of ProofLabor CodeBoard RuleDismissal
References
0
Case No. ADJ2954707 (LAO 0811130)
Regular
Aug 14, 2017

MARIA ACEVEDO vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, KAISER PERMANENTE

This case involves Maria Acevedo's petition for reconsideration before the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB dismissed Acevedo's petition as successive because it raised the same issues as a prior petition on which she did not prevail. Established precedent dictates that a party cannot file a second petition for reconsideration unless newly aggrieved or if new evidence was considered. Since no new evidence was presented, the WCAB found the current petition impermissible and therefore dismissed it.

Petition for ReconsiderationSuccessive PetitionNewly AggrievedWrit of ReviewNew EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJPermanente Medical GroupKaiser PermanenteSedgwick CMS
References
5
Case No. ADJ9382780
Regular
Feb 10, 2016

SANG BO LEE vs. M&J MANAGEMENT GROUPL, INC., EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a successive petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant, Sang Bo Lee, after a prior petition on the same issues was denied. The Appeals Board dismissed the current petition because it did not present new evidence and addressed the same arguments as the initial filing. California law generally prohibits successive petitions unless a party is newly aggrieved or the Board's decision was based on new evidence. Because neither condition was met, the applicant's petition was dismissed.

Successive petitionPetition for reconsiderationAppeals BoardDismissalNewly aggrievedNew evidenceWrit of reviewWCJ reportNavarro v. A & A FramingGoodrich v. Industrial Acc. Com.
References
5
Case No. ADJ3964372 (MON 0247784) ADJ4081926 (MON 0247785)
Regular
Sep 19, 2019

ROBERT BAKER vs. CITY OF COMPTON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Robert Baker's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. The petition was filed on March 27, 2019, well past the January 2, 2019 deadline after a prior order on December 7, 2018. Additionally, the petition was deemed successive as it was filed after a previous petition was denied and the applicant had not become newly aggrieved. Therefore, the Board lacked jurisdiction to consider the untimely and successive petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelySuccessiveLabor Code § 5909Due ProcessTolledJurisdictionalWCABWrit of ReviewShipley v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
9
Case No. ADJ13831424
Regular
Feb 27, 2023

FELIPE MARTINEZ, Deceased vs. ONE WORLD VENTURES, LLC, ALASKA NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a successive petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant after an initial petition was denied. The Appeals Board dismissed the current petition as successive, citing established precedent that a second petition is not allowed unless the petitioner is newly aggrieved or new evidence is presented. Because no new evidence was introduced and the petition raised the same issues as the prior one, it was deemed waived and dismissed. The Board also noted that the September 16, 2022 order being challenged was not a final order.

Successive PetitionPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdjudication NumberDismissalEn Banc DecisionWrit of ReviewNew EvidenceLabor Code Section 5902Labor Code Section 5904
References
11
Case No. ADJ144234 (VNO 0533862)
Regular
Jan 03, 2018

DONALD CARVER vs. INVESTMENT ENTERPRISES, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a lien claimant's second petition for reconsideration, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed as successive. The WCAB held that a party cannot file a second reconsideration petition unless newly aggrieved or if new evidence not presented at trial was the basis for the WCAB's prior decision. In this instance, the prior decision was based on existing findings and did not involve new evidence, thus rendering the subsequent petition improper. The WCAB reiterated that such matters are typically addressed through a writ of review.

successive petition for reconsiderationlien claimantnewly aggrievedwrit of reviewAOE/COEmedical-legal expensesLabor Code 4603.2waiverPre-Trial Conference StatementMinutes of Hearing and Summary of Evidence
References
6
Case No. ADJ6692071
Regular
Aug 19, 2015

TITO FELIX vs. KSL RELP MANAGEMENT, LIBERTY MUTUAL

This case involves a worker's compensation claim where the Applicant, Tito Felix, filed a petition for reconsideration. The Appeals Board dismissed this petition because it was deemed "successive." Established legal precedent dictates that a party cannot file a second petition for reconsideration if their first one was unsuccessful, unless new evidence was introduced that rendered them "newly aggrieved." In this instance, the petition raised the same arguments as a prior, denied petition, and no new evidence was presented. Therefore, the petition was dismissed without prejudice as it violated established procedural rules.

Successive petitionPetition for reconsiderationAppeals BoardWorkers' compensationWCJNewly aggrievedPetition for writ of reviewNew evidenceDismissalGoodrich v. Industrial Acc. Com.
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 477 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