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. ADJ6528393
Regular
May 18, 2012

OFELIA SALCEDO vs. P.F. CHANG'S CHINA BISTRO, CHUBB GROUP

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's award, and returned the matter for further proceedings. This was because the Board found that neither the treating physician's reports nor the QME's report constituted substantial evidence to support the original award. The Board requires further development of the record, potentially through re-evaluations with both physicians, to properly assess the applicant's permanent disability. Therefore, the defendant's contentions regarding evidentiary issues are currently moot.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOfelia SalcedoP.F. Chang's China BistroChubb GroupReconsiderationFindings Orders and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeIndustrial InjuryLeft HandFourth and Fifth Digits
References
Case No. ADJ7953283, ADJ9789480, ADJ9789260
Regular
Dec 27, 2016

OFELIA VALENCIA vs. PROFESSIONAL HOSPITAL SUPPLY, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PA

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the petitioner in the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The petitioner subsequently withdrew this petition. Consequently, the Board has issued an order dismissing the Petition for Reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedWithdrawnWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardProfessional Hospital SupplyAmerican Casualty CompanyGallagher Bassett ServicesADJ7953283ADJ9789480ADJ9789260
References
Case No. ADJ9621120, ADJ9621126
Regular
Jan 05, 2017

OFELIA GARCIA GUERRERO vs. HAWK II ENVIROMENTAL, CNA CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Ofelia Garcia Guerrero's Petition for Removal in cases ADJ9621120 and ADJ9621126. Removal is an extraordinary remedy, and the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was denied. Furthermore, the WCAB found that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy should an adverse decision be issued later. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's report in its denial.

Petition for RemovalDeniedSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyExtraordinary RemedyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportVan Nuys District Office
References
Case No. ADJ9217031
Regular
Sep 15, 2015

OFELIA GONZALEZ vs. RANCHO HARVEST, TWIN CITIES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant Ofelia Gonzalez's petition for reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied her petition for removal, an extraordinary remedy, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm that reconsideration would not adequately address. The WCJ's decision addressed only an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and removal were dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary RemedySubstantial Prejudice
References
Case No. ADJ7122712, ADJ7122713
Regular
Dec 18, 2013

OFELIA INIGUEZ vs. FOSTER FARMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order approving a compromise and release agreement for $25,000, which awarded applicant's attorney a 15% fee instead of the requested 20%. The Board found the attorney's petition for reconsideration to be frivolous and meritless, lacking proper legal justification for an increased fee. Furthermore, the attorney failed to comply with procedural rules, including not providing proof of notice to her client regarding adverse interests and improperly attaching exhibits. Consequently, the Board issued a notice of intention to impose sanctions against the attorney for bad faith actions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAttorney's FeeCompromise and Release AgreementAdequacy HearingSanctionLabor Code section 5813Policy and Procedure ManualQuantum MeruitAdverse Interest Notice
References
Case No. LAO 0829008
Regular
Apr 01, 2008

CHRISTINA D. SALCEDO vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration as the WCJ's order denying invasive diagnostic tests was not a final order. However, the Board granted removal due to potential due process issues and the need to fully develop the record on causation. The decision deferred the issue of diagnostic tests, affirming other aspects of the WCJ's order and returning the case for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRemovalDiagnostic TestsInvasiveCompelUrological InjuryCompensable ConsequenceDue ProcessMedical Proof
References
Case No. ADJ1787217
Regular
Jul 27, 2011

OFELIA LLAMAS vs. SUN TEN LABORATORIES INC., ZENITH INSURANCE CO.

The Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the disallowance of their liens for unauthorized treatment outside the Medical Provider Network (MPN). The lien claimant's arguments regarding defendant's denial of benefits and MPN notification failures were rejected, as the evidence showed timely MPN care was offered and the MPN notification issue was not raised at trial. The Board also initiated sanctions against the lien claimant's representative for filing a frivolous petition citing non-existent documents and outside evidence, finding this constituted bad faith and a waste of Board resources.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantMPN providersunauthorized treatmentself-procure medical treatmentMPN employee notification requirementsCCR 9767.12reasonableness and necessityPetition for ReconsiderationOrder of Removal
References
Case No. ADJ8180899
Regular
Oct 17, 2013

ALAN SALCEDO vs. NUSIL TECHNOLOGY, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC

This order denies the Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration in a workers' compensation case. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) adopted and incorporated the findings and reasons presented in the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) report. The WCAB also granted great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration is formally denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNusil TechnologyIllinois Midwest Insurance AgencyStar Insurance CompanyADJ8180899Bakersfield District Office
References
Showing 1-8 of 8 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