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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
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. ADJ7632202, ADJ7632184
Regular
Apr 13, 2015

TAYDE CHAPARRO vs. TALBOTS, INC, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Tayde Chaparro's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board found that the petition sought reconsideration of a non-final, interlocutory order, not a final decision that determines substantive rights, liabilities, or threshold issues. Therefore, as the order was not final, the petition was procedurally improper and dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-final orderFinal orderSubstantive rightLiabilityThreshold issueInterlocutoryProcedural decisionEvidentiary decisionWCJ decision
References
Case No. ADJ10211772
Regular
Dec 06, 2016

KELLY TUCKETT vs. CITY OF BELLFLOWER, YORK ROSEVILLE

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Applicant Kelly Tuckett against the City of Bellflower and York Roseville. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was filed in response to a non-final order. California law dictates that reconsideration can only be sought from final orders that determine substantive rights, liabilities, or threshold issues. The WCAB found the administrative law judge's decision addressed only an intermediate procedural or evidentiary matter, not a final determination.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-final orderFinal orderSubstantive rightLiabilityThreshold issueInterlocutory decisionProcedural decisionEvidentiary decisionWCJ report
References
Case No. ADJ8770457
Regular
Apr 21, 2015

NICK IVANOFF vs. VIRONEX, BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Nick Ivanoff's Petition for Reconsideration. The WCAB found that a petition for reconsideration can only be filed from a "final" order, decision, or award, which must determine substantive rights or liabilities, or a fundamental threshold issue. The Judge's decision in this case was deemed an interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decision, not a final one. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as it was improperly filed.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-final OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ12788878
Regular
Dec 10, 2020

MARIO LUPERCIO PEREZ vs. ARMANDO CHAN dba CHAN DRAINAGE, MARKEL INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed as a removal petition challenging interlocutory issues. Although the WCJ's decision contained a final threshold finding of injury AOE/COE, the defendant only disputed the specialty of a QME and the timeliness of an objection, which are interlocutory. The Board found no significant prejudice or irreparable harm to justify removal, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy later if a final adverse decision issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationThreshold IssueInterlocutory IssueInjury AOE/COEQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Treating Physician ReportRemoval StandardSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ9139200
Regular
Dec 11, 2015

MATTHEW BAKES vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Matthew Bakes' petition for reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final order. California law requires petitions for reconsideration to be based on "final" orders that determine substantive rights, liabilities, or threshold issues, not interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions. The WCJ's decision at issue here only resolved an intermediate procedural or evidentiary matter. Thus, it was not a final order, and the petition was procedurally improper.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-final orderFinal orderSubstantive rightLiabilityThreshold issueInterlocutoryProcedural decisionsEvidentiary decisionsRemoval
References
Case No. ADJ8651999
Regular
Jul 18, 2014

CARL YARDE (Deceased) vs. EIU OF CALIFORNIA, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, ZURICH INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order dismisses a Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a final order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denies removal, adopting the administrative law judge's reasoning that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The petition addressed interlocutory procedural matters, not a final decision. Consequently, the WCAB found the petition procedurally improper and denied removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory DecisionProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionNon-final OrderAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ7022015
Regular
Jan 28, 2013

SALVADOR SANCHEZ vs. BENTLEY PRINCE STREET, THE HARTFORD, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

This order dismisses applicant Salvador Sanchez's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order determining substantive rights, but rather from interlocutory procedural decisions. The Board further denies the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Applicant's procedural requests were deemed non-final and therefore not subject to reconsideration or removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionNon-FinalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ10127263
Regular
Jun 14, 2018

SANTIAGO MALDONADO RODRIGUEZ vs. SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Santiago Maldonado Rodriguez's Petition for Reconsideration. The petition sought review of a non-final "Notice of Intention to Disburse Attorney Fee," which the WCAB clarified is not an order. Petitions for reconsideration can only be filed from final orders, decisions, or awards that determine substantive rights or liabilities or threshold issues. As the notice was not a final order, the WCAB dismissed the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-Final OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutoryProcedural DecisionsEvidentiary DecisionsNotice of Intention to Disburse Attorney Fee
References
Showing 1-10 of 9,863 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