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. ADJ10243805 ADJ10243806
Regular
Oct 20, 2025

ENELIA GARCIA vs. NORTHRIDGE HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER, SEDGWICK

Applicant Enelia Garcia filed a Petition for Removal (ADJ10243805) against minute orders setting a virtual trial and allowing a claims adjuster to appear virtually, citing due process violations and non-compliance with rules. Additionally, the applicant filed a Petition for Reconsideration (ADJ10243806) challenging a Findings and Order regarding new and further disability, occupational code, and the basis to reopen her case. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed both petitions and granted them, rescinding the September 4, 2025 minute orders and the July 16, 2025 Findings and Order. The matters were returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the Board's opinion, emphasizing the importance of creating a proper record and ensuring due process.

RemovalReconsiderationVirtual TrialChicago DogsWCJMinute OrdersFindings and OrderStipulations and AwardNew and Further DisabilityOccupational Code
References
42
Case No. ADJ3218661 (OAK 0339889)
Regular
Feb 07, 2011

CHANCE ROLLINS vs. JOHN MARTIN STABLES, INC.; AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE administered by AIG, CLAIMS SERVICES

The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration, finding the WCJ's ruling was not a final order. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and denied the applicant's request for a neurology consultation under Labor Code §4601(a). The matter was returned to the trial level with instructions to issue an order for a new QME panel in neurology, as Dr. Jamasbi's request for a consultative neurological evaluation constituted good cause for a new panel under 8 Cal. Code Regs. §31.7. Attorney fees for the ex parte communication were upheld.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code 4601(a)Labor Code 4062.3QMEAgreed Medical EvaluatorNeurological ConsultMedical DirectorSpecialty Panel
References
0
Case No. ADJ4522242 (VNO 0452421) ADJ522765 (VNO 0452422)
Regular
May 26, 2011

PAUL ALLGOOD vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted lien claimant's petition for removal to rescind an Administrative Law Judge's order compelling Dr. Baden's appearance at trial. The Board found no good cause was established for Dr. Baden's direct examination and that the order was not a final, appealable decision. Removal was granted to prevent prejudice to the lien claimant, and the order for Dr. Baden's appearance was rescinded. The Board also dismissed the lien claimant's prior petition for reconsideration.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ OrderDr. Scott BadenGood CauseMedical WitnessDirect ExaminationWritten ReportsBoard Rule 10606
References
11
Case No. LAO 0834414
Regular
Mar 03, 2008

NATASHA FANE vs. PRIME CLINICAL SYSTEMS, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE, ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Everest's petition for reconsideration, rescinded a prior order, and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine contribution liability between Everest and Argonaut. Argonaut's petition for reconsideration was dismissed as it was not a final order, but its petition for removal was granted, rescinding an improperly issued joinder order and issuing a new order joining Argonaut as a party defendant. The Board clarified that contribution proceedings under Labor Code section 5500.5(e) can be initiated after a settlement and that Argonaut, having been notified, may not be bound by prior evidentiary records.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNatasha FanePrime Clinical SystemsInc.Everest National InsuranceArgonaut Insurance CompanyContributionLabor Code section 5500.5(b)Labor Code section 5500.5(e)Compromise and Release
References
0
Case No. ADJ2663736 (SFO 0480309), ADJ2844751 (SFO 0480630)
Regular
Jan 05, 2012

VILMA TENTNOWSKI vs. PEROTTI & CARRADE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded its prior order granting reconsideration because the defendant's petition was not taken from a final order. Therefore, the Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration and denied it as a petition for removal. A dissenting commissioner argued that reconsideration should not have been granted but believed the WCJ's original finding of 95% permanent disability was correct. The dissenter advocated for reinstating the original award based on existing medical evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPerotti & CarradeState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalImprovidently GrantedFinal OrderMedical Record DevelopmentPermanent DisabilityPsychiatric Disability
References
3
Case No. ADJ7781989; ADJ8262771
Regular
Oct 03, 2013

MIRIAN GARCIA vs. COOPER COLD FOODS, INC., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY as administrator for STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is granting reconsideration of its own prior decision and rescinding a July 23, 2013 decision that had overturned a prior finding of 2% permanent disability for applicant's right knee injury. The WCAB determined that its August 9, 2012 order granting reconsideration was improvidently granted because the applicant had already filed a successive and improper petition for reconsideration. Consequently, the prior order and the subsequent rescinded decision are vacated, and the applicant's petition for reconsideration is dismissed.

WCABReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgePermanent DisabilityIndustrial InjurySuccessive PetitionImprovidently GrantedVacated
References
4
Case No. ADJ987728 (GOL 0100705) ADJ361855 (GOL 0100706)
Regular
Sep 22, 2009

CYNTHIA SIEGERT vs. COTTAGE HEALTH SYSTEM; permissibly self-insured, administered by KEENAN \u0026 ASSOCIATES

This case concerns a defendant's attempt to appeal a non-final order that took the matter off calendar for further medical record development. The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration, deeming it improvidently granted as the original order was not a final decision. The Board also denied the defendant's petition for removal, finding no irreparable harm or significant prejudice. This action effectively dismissed the defendant's procedural challenges to the WCJ's management of the case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalVacating OrderDismissing PetitionDenying PetitionAgreed Medical EvaluatorFurther DiscoveryAlmarazOgilvie
References
4
Case No. ADJ9910901
Regular
Oct 04, 2019

JOSE MARTINEZ vs. WEST LAKE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for disqualification of a judge, finding no evidence of bias. The Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, as it was filed against a non-final procedural order. However, the Board granted the lien claimant's petition for removal and rescinded the judge's order compelling the lien claimant's representative to appear, due to procedural issues regarding potential sanctions. The matter was returned to the judge for further proceedings consistent with the Board's opinion.

WCABPetition for DisqualificationPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLien ClaimantWorkers' Compensation JudgeWCJ EdelbergMinute OrderAni BalianDebra Ketchens
References
2
Case No. ADJ10614689
Regular
May 04, 2018

ALEJANDRO SOSA vs. ADVANCED KNITTING MILLS, EMPLOYERS PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's order for an additional orthopedic QME panel, arguing it was an abuse of discretion and caused prejudice. The Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petition as the order was not a final decision. However, the Board granted the petition for removal, finding the WCJ erred by ordering the panel based on a QME's recommendation for treatment rather than a disputed medical issue outside the QME's scope. The Board rescinded the WCJ's order, returning the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelOrthopedicsChiropracticMedical-legal evaluationAbuse of discretionSubstantial prejudice
References
5
Case No. ADJ1534095 (LAO 0820188)
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

PAMELA MCMILLIN vs. XEROX CORPORATION; ACE USA, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing its lien was untimely filed. Because the original petition was untimely, the administrative law judge lacked jurisdiction to rescind the dismissal order. Therefore, the Board rescinded the judge's order and dismissed the lien claimant's petition, leaving the original dismissal order in effect.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Rescinding DecisionLien ClaimLien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06JurisdictionUntimely FilingCompromise and ReleaseWCJ
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 32,044 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