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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
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. ADJ6793843
Regular
Jan 24, 2012

CHRIS WHITE vs. B & B MOTORS, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration, dismissing the lien claimant's petition. The Board found reconsideration was improvidently granted as the lien claimant sought to reconsider a nonexistent order of dismissal. Reconsideration is only permissible for final orders, and the WCJ's comments did not constitute a final order. The lien claimant will be able to seek reconsideration after a final dismissal order is issued.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalIndustrial injuryCalendaring errorCalifornia Code of Procedure section 473Notice of Intention to Dismiss LienFinal orderDecision After ReconsiderationOpinion and Order Granting Petition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ4139709
Regular
Jan 14, 2010

JORGE HERRERA vs. ROMANO'S MACARONI GRILL, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Applicant filed a petition for reconsideration from a non-final Notice of Intention to Dismiss, which is procedurally improper. Simultaneously, a different judge approved a Compromise and Release Agreement on the same day the petition was filed, an action beyond the judge's authority once the petition was pending. The Board dismissed the Applicant's petition for reconsideration and, on its own motion, granted reconsideration of the approved Compromise and Release. Consequently, the Order Approving Compromise and Release was vacated and the matter remanded for further consideration of the agreement.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalMandatory Settlement ConferenceCompromise and Release AgreementNotice of Intention to DismissWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJEAMSLabor CodeFinal Order
References
Case No. ADJ7077460
Regular
Nov 04, 2013

MARIA ZEPEDA vs. CANDLE LAMP COMPANY, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendants' Petition for Reconsideration. The Board ruled that a petition for reconsideration can only be filed after a final order, and the Board's prior order granting reconsideration was interlocutory, not final. Because the petition sought reconsideration of a non-final order, it was procedurally improper and thus dismissed. The Board also noted the defendants' failure to respond to the initial petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderGranting ReconsiderationOrder Vacating DismissalLien ClaimantWCJ's ReportLien Activation FeeProof of ServiceDismissed
References
Case No. ADJ7813636
Regular
Oct 28, 2013

RAMONA GARNICA vs. ESPARZA ENTERPRISES

Willow Medical Group sought reconsideration of a dismissed lien, alleging it had paid all required fees. However, the administrative law judge (WCJ) reported no order dismissing the lien on the date cited by Willow. Since reconsideration is only available for final orders and no such order exists in the record, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Willow's petition. The lien claimant's prior dismissal order had already been vacated by the WCJ.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissed lienOrder to DismissVacated orderCompromise and ReleaseWCJ ReportEAMS recordProcedural historySubstantive right
References
Case No. ADJ1173558
Regular
Feb 25, 2014

CLORIA SAMAYOA vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was taken from a non-final interlocutory order, not a final decision determining substantive rights. The Board also denied the defendant's petition for removal, adopting the Administrative Law Judge's reasoning that no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm was demonstrated. The underlying issue involved an order rescinding the dismissal of a lien claimant's lien, which the defendant sought to overturn. The Board found that rescinding the dismissal was necessary to allow the defendant to pursue their petition for costs and sanctions against the lien claimant.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalInterlocutory OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityProcedural DecisionsEvidentiary DecisionsRemoval DeniedReconsideration Dismissed
References
Case No. ADJ1340949 (MON 0357520)
Regular
Sep 16, 2013

MARCO ROSALES vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES

Here is a summary of the case for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order dismissing lien claimant Jerry A. Jacobson's attorney fee lien. The dismissal was based on Mr. Jacobson's failure to appear at a mandatory settlement conference, but the Board found the WCJ improperly designated applicant's counsel to serve a self-executing dismissal order. Furthermore, there was no proof of service of the dismissal order or confirmation that a timely objection was not received. The Board rescinded the dismissal order and returned the case to the trial level for proper notice and further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantDismissal of LienReconsiderationWCJ ErrorAttorney FeesDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedEAMSAppeals Board Rule 10770.1(h)Notice of Intention to Dismiss
References
Case No. SAC 0343316
Regular
Aug 14, 2007

MELODY BRIDGES vs. SCHURMAN FINE PAPERS, CRUM & FORSTER

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of its prior order dismissing the applicant's petition, finding it was timely filed. Despite the applicant's petition being deemed timely, the Board, adopting the Judge's report, ultimately denied reconsideration of the original April 4, 2007 findings. This rescinds the dismissal order but affirms the denial of the initial request for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition to VacateOpinion and Order Dismissing ReconsiderationTimeliness of FilingPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ Findings and OrdersTemporary DisabilitySalary During DisabilityProof of ServiceElectronic Case History Log
References
Case No. ADJ884160 (LBO 0394637)
Regular
Mar 08, 2013

Shahdeh Khodawandi vs. Disneyland Resort

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order dismissing lien claimant Dr. Thomas's lien claim. The dismissal occurred after Dr. Thomas and his then-agent failed to appear at a lien conference and a subsequent Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOI) was not properly served on his agent. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration timely as the dismissal order was not properly served on Dr. Thomas's agent of record. Furthermore, the dismissal order was issued prematurely, before the full 35-day period for a response to the NOI had expired, even with the mail-delay extension. The case is returned to the trial level to determine if Dr. Thomas has good cause to set aside the NOI.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ConferenceCompromise and ReleaseNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienGood CauseService of ProcessAgent of Record
References
Showing 1-10 of 16,451 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