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. 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. ADJ8546699
Regular
Apr 10, 2017

MARIA HERRERA vs. YONEKYU USA, INC., SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS DIAMOND BAR, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to lien claimants Preferred Scan and Tower Imaging, rescinding the dismissal of their liens. The WCAB found that the notices of representation filed by the lien claimants' representative at the lien trial, despite not being formal "change of representation" notices, were sufficient under WCAB Rule 10774.5(e)(2) because no prior representation notice was on file. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings before a different judge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationWCJDismissed LiensNotice of RepresentationWCAB Rule 10774.5Lien TrialRepresentative AppearanceRescinded Orders
References
0
Case No. ADJ739750 (FRE 0217695) ADJ3422922 (FRE 0217696) ADJ4620151 (FRE 0217213)
Regular
Sep 23, 2010

JERRY P. WILLIAMS vs. GOLDEN STATE VINTNERS and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) initially issued a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions against State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) for failing to provide a computer printout of benefits. SCIF objected, asserting the printout was available at a prior Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) with a former attorney. Although the printout was not explicitly mentioned in the MSC pre-trial statement or offered at trial, the WCAB accepted SCIF's representation of its availability. Consequently, finding no willful failure to comply with a regulatory obligation, the WCAB dismissed the Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNotice of Intention To Impose SanctionsWCAB Rule 10607computer printout of benefitsMandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)Declaration of Desiree A. Mercadopre-trial conference statementproposed exhibitsEAMSwillful failure to comply
References
0
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 03690
Regular Panel Decision
May 11, 2016

Anderson v. Armentano

Thomas E. Anderson (the plaintiff) initiated a legal malpractice action against William V. Armentano, Esq., and Grey & Grey, LLP (G&G). The plaintiff alleged injuries from a fall and subsequently retained G&G, among other attorneys, for potential claims. Crucially, G&G failed to file a timely notice of claim against the Town of Oyster Bay. After a proceeding for leave to file a late notice of claim was initially granted by the Supreme Court but later reversed by the Appellate Division, the plaintiff commenced the malpractice suit. G&G moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting that their representation was limited solely to the plaintiff's Workers' Compensation claim, supported by a 'Notice of Retainer and Appearance-Additional Attorney.' The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, denied G&G's motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the evidence presented by G&G (letters and an affirmation) did not qualify as documentary evidence for dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(1), and the Workers' Compensation Board Notice did not conclusively refute the plaintiff's claim of broader representation.

Legal MalpracticeDocumentary EvidenceMotion to DismissCPLR 3211(a)(1)Workers' Compensation ClaimScope of RepresentationAppellate ReviewNotice of ClaimSufficiency of EvidenceLitigation
References
23
Case No. ADJ1377104 (VNO 0494626) ADJ4461737 (VNO 0494235) ADJ1560314 (VNO 0494624) ADJ4309040 (VNO 0494121) ADJ121879 (VNO 0494236)
Regular
May 11, 2016

STEFFANI ALVAREZ vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimants' petition for reconsideration because it was filed one day late. The Board affirmed the WCJ's dismissal of the liens for failure to file a notice of representation. The opinion also provides detailed guidance on the strict requirements for filing a notice of representation under WCAB Rule 10774.5.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLien claimantsNotice of representationWCJTimelinessLabor CodeRule 10774.5Allied Injury ManagementSan Bernardino
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Angulo v. City of New York

In a personal injury action, the defendant City of New York appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County. The original order denied the City's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to timely serve a notice of claim and granted the plaintiff's cross-motion to deem his notice of claim timely served nunc pro tunc. The plaintiff, injured in May 2005, served his notice of claim in August 2005, which the City rejected as untimely. The Appellate Division reversed the lower court's order, granting the City's motion to dismiss the complaint and denying the plaintiff's cross-motion. The court held that timely service of a notice of claim is a condition precedent to suing the City and that the plaintiff failed to make a timely application for leave to serve a late notice of claim. Furthermore, the court ruled that the plaintiff could not rely on the workers' compensation carrier's notice of claim.

Personal InjuryNotice of ClaimTimelinessCondition PrecedentCPLR 3211(a)(7)General Municipal Law § 50-eDismissal of ComplaintLate Notice of ClaimNunc Pro TuncWorkers' Compensation Carrier
References
7
Case No. ADJ6573692
Regular
May 09, 2016

Gloria Mares vs. 99 Cents Only Stores, Broadspire

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involved a petition for reconsideration filed by lien claimants. The petition was dismissed because the lien claimants' representative, Frank Ureno, failed to file a proper Notice of Representation with the Board. This procedural defect, the failure to comply with notice requirements for representation, was grounds for dismissal. The Board also noted that the petition would have been denied on its merits if not for the procedural issue.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien claimantsNotice of RepresentationHearing RepresentativeCalifornia Code of Regulations 10774.5DismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportUn-numbered pagesOrder Dismissing Lien Balance
References
0
Case No. ADJ8077330
Regular
Jan 26, 2018

LISA HENRY vs. ALLIED BARTON SECURITY SERVICES, Insured By ARCH COMPANY, Administered By ESIS CHATSWORTH

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of orders dismissing their liens due to alleged failure to file a Notice of Change of Representation. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the proof of service for the dismissal orders was insufficient, making the lien claimants' petition timely. Furthermore, the Board found that lien claimants complied with WCAB Rule 10774.5(e) by presenting their Notice of Representation at the lien trial. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the dismissal orders and returned the matter for further proceedings.

WCABLien ClaimantsNotice of Change of RepresentationWCAB Rule 10774.5(e)(2)Petition for ReconsiderationWCJEAMSOfficial Address RecordProof of Servicetimely filed
References
13
Case No. ADJ9985796
Regular
Aug 13, 2019

OSCAR AYALA vs. SAN CLEMENT BODY SHOP, LLC, AMGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY, GUARD INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of the lien claim, finding the claimant failed to prove injury arising out of and in the course of employment and that services were provided prior to the denial. The claimant's representative repeatedly appeared without a proper Notice of Representation filed with the Board. The Board concluded that the representative's failure to file a valid Notice of Representation, despite multiple opportunities, justified the denial of the lien claim.

Notice of RepresentationLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationWCJAOE/COEFindings of Fact and OrderCompromise and ReleaseDue ProcessWCAB Rule 10774.5EAMS
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 07, 2007

Lentz v. Spanky's Restaurant II, Inc.

This Amended Order addresses a plaintiff's motion for notice to potential class members in a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action. The plaintiff, a waiter, alleges that defendants Spanky’s Restaurant II, Inc. d/b/a Double Nickel Steakhouse, Lisa West, and Lady West Enterprises, LTD d/b/a Double Nickel Steakhouse violated FLSA by requiring waitstaff to participate in a "tip pool" with expediters who do not customarily receive tips and by failing to display required notice. The court, considering both the Lusardi and Shushan approaches to class certification, denied the plaintiff's motion. The denial was based on the plaintiff's failure to identify a sufficient number of similarly situated individuals and to provide adequate factual evidence beyond conclusory allegations. The court also noted the novelty of defining expediters' eligibility for tip-sharing and concerns about the breadth of the proposed notice. Consequently, the plaintiff's motion for notice to potential class members was denied.

FLSACollective ActionTip PoolingClass CertificationSimilarly SituatedWage and HourEmployment LawFair Labor Standards ActNotice RequirementsDenial of Motion
References
30
Showing 1-10 of 4,693 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