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. ADJ8693165
Regular
Sep 03, 2013

JEREMY VALENCIA vs. AGI PUBLISHING, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded an order imposing sanctions against the injured worker's attorney. This was due to improper service of the sanctions order and lack of sufficient notice, preventing the attorney from an adequate opportunity to be heard. The WCAB denied the petition for disqualification of the judge, finding no evidence of bias. The petition concerning the notice of intention to dismiss the case was dismissed as it was not a final order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsNotice of Intention to DismissWCJInjured WorkerCounselService of ProcessOfficial Address Record
References
5
Case No. ADJ7403543
Regular
Nov 20, 2012

CRESENCIO AYALA vs. ALABAMA METAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it sought to challenge a notice of intent to dismiss, not a final order, and was unverified. The Board also granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions against the applicant's attorney. This action is due to the filing of a frivolous and unverified petition without merit. Sanctions will be imposed unless the attorney demonstrates good cause to the contrary.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DismissLack of ProsecutionUnverified PetitionFinal OrderLabor Code § 5900Labor Code § 5902RemovalLabor Code § 5813
References
5
Case No. ADJ6711975
Regular
Aug 05, 2013

DIONICIO REYES vs. FILOMENA D'AMORE, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition to vacate an order dismissing their lien for failure to pay an activation fee. The petition was untimely, filed 59 days after the order was served. The Board also granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions due to the petition's untimeliness and multiple misrepresentations of fact. The Board is considering imposing a $500 sanction against the lien claimant's representative.

Lien ClaimantPetition to Vacate OrderLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Untimely PetitionRemoval on Own MotionNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Misrepresented Material FactsWCAB Rule 10842(a)
References
0
Case No. ADJ2303350 (FRE 0230817)
Regular
Apr 05, 2013

Benjamin Martinez vs. Boghossian Raisin Packing, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of notices to dismiss their liens, but the Appeals Board dismissed their petition as interlocutory orders are not subject to reconsideration. The Board granted removal on its own motion and intends to sanction the lien claimants' representative, AMR Group, and the lien claimants themselves (Hooty Services and Accutox) for frivolous and bad-faith actions. This intent to sanction stems from their attempt to challenge a procedural order clearly permitted by Appeals Board rules.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsNotice of IntentionDismissalRemovalSanctionsLabor CodeFinal OrderInterlocutory Decisions
References
7
Case No. ADJ3362266 (LAO 0805454)
Regular
Oct 29, 2010

ROBERTO PINEDA vs. CIRCUIT CITY, CIRCUIT CITY SELFINSURED SECURITY FUND

The WCAB dismissed Shandler & Associates' petition for reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory order (Notice of Intent to Dismiss Liens), not a final order. Even if treated as a removal petition, it was denied due to a lack of demonstrated significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board, however, removed the case on its own motion to consider sanctions against Shandler & Associates for filing a frivolous petition. Sanctions of $250.00 are proposed for bad-faith litigation tactics, payable to the General Fund.

Notice of Intent to Dismiss LiensPetition for ReconsiderationOrder of RemovalSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Interlocutory Procedural OrdersSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmBad-Faith ActionsFrivolous Petition
References
12
Case No. ADJ2854263 (ANA 0400148)
Regular
Apr 21, 2014

MARIA QUEZEDA vs. TACO BELL, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claim for failure to pay an activation fee. The WCAB is now giving notice of its intention to dismiss the lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed over three months late and by a representative who failed to comply with WCAB rules regarding notice of representation. The lien claimant must provide evidence of timely filing and compliance with representation rules within 15 days to avoid dismissal. The Board also notes the lien claimant may not have filed a required declaration to support their lien.

Lien activation feePetition for ReconsiderationWCAB Rule 10774.5Notice of RepresentationCollective ResourcesAngelotti Chiropractic v. BakerPreliminary injunctionLabor Code section 5903Timeliness of filingWCAB Rule 10510(a)(3)
References
1
Case No. ADJ4693318 (LAO 0790101) ADJ4457039 (LAO 0790245)
Regular
Nov 04, 2011

ALIONZO AVILA vs. L &M DIVERSIFIED, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, by XCHANING for FREMONT INSURANCE CO. and HIH AMERICA in liquidation, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, CNA CLAIM PLUS

A lien claimant's petition for reconsideration was dismissed for being untimely, unverified, and lacking substantive grounds, echoing the WCJ's original dismissal order. This dismissal was based on the claimant's failure to appear at a lien trial and respond to a notice of intent. The Appeals Board is also initiating sanctions against the lien claimant and their representative for filing a frivolous and bad faith petition, citing their repeated failures and misuse of Board resources.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissal of LienUnverified PetitionUntimely PetitionFailure to AppearSanctionsLabor Code §5813Bad FaithFrivolous Tactics
References
1
Case No. ADJ5814563
Regular
Nov 19, 2012

MARIA VILLEGAS vs. BURKE WILLIAMS, INC., TRAVELERS SACRAMENTO

The Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely, unverified, and unserved. The Board also initiated removal and a notice of intention to impose a $250 sanction against the lien claimant and its representative for frivolous conduct, including filing a petition with willful misrepresentations of the record. The lien claimant failed to appear at a lien conference, leading to a Notice of Intention to Dismiss, which formed the basis of the dismissed petition. The Board found the lien claimant's assertion of lack of notice contradicted the record, which showed service of the conference notice.

Notice of Intention to Dismiss LienPetition for ReconsiderationLien claimantRemovalSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Due processVerificationServiceUntimely
References
9
Case No. ADJ6502736
Regular
Oct 19, 2011

JUAN BARCENAS vs. THE BEST MASTER ENTERPRISES, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final notice of intention to dismiss, not an actual decision. The WCAB granted removal to address the frivolous nature of the petition, as it lacked reasonable justification and wasted judicial resources. Consequently, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to impose a $500 sanction on the lien claimant for filing this unjustified petition. The lien claimant has 15 days to object with good cause.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to Dismiss LiensLien ClaimantWCJRemovalSanctionLabor Code section 5813Reasonable JustificationFrivolous Petition
References
3
Case No. ADJ7104576
Regular
Mar 09, 2012

DEVEL MOORE vs. GAMEWORKS/SEGA AMERICA, INC., MITSUI SUMIMOTO INSURANCE GROUP, MITSUI SUMIMOTO MARINE MANAGEMENT

Lien claimants improperly petitioned for reconsideration of an interlocutory order denying discovery, which is not a final order subject to reconsideration. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition and granted removal on its own motion to address the discovery dispute. The Board also issued a notice of intention to impose sanctions against the lien claimants and their counsel for bad-faith, frivolous actions and unprofessional conduct. Sanctions may be imposed up to $2,500 unless good cause is shown otherwise.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsDiscovery RequestsFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderRemovalSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Bad Faith
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 28,852 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