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The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded an order imposing sanctions against the injured worker's attorney.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. 2022 NY Slip Op 04872 [208 AD3d 1046]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 04, 2022

Perri v. Case

Plaintiff Michael Perri sued defendant Mark Case, doing business as Case's Mini Storage, alleging breach of contract and seeking specific performance related to a right of first refusal for leased property. The Supreme Court, Ontario County, granted Perri's motion for summary judgment. Case appealed this order and judgment (Appeal No. 1), also appealing the denial of a motion to reargue/renew (Appeal No. 2), and an order holding him in civil contempt (Appeal No. 3). The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's order and judgment in Appeal No. 1. Appeal No. 2, which sought reargument, was dismissed as non-appealable. In Appeal No. 3, the Cook defendants' appeal was dismissed, and Case's appeal challenging the civil contempt finding was rejected, thereby upholding the contempt order.

Breach of ContractRight of First RefusalSummary JudgmentDeclaratory JudgmentSpecific PerformanceCivil ContemptAppellate ReviewReal PropertyLease AgreementWaiver
References
15
Case No. ADJ7541189
Regular
Jul 22, 2013

MARIA DEL CARMEN POSADA vs. MICHAEL JOSEPH FURIE SALON, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY

This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of an order dismissing its lien. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because the claimant was not a party to the case in which the order was issued, therefore it was not aggrieved by the order. The Board noted procedural issues with the original order's service and the judge's subsequent attempt to vacate it. However, the dismissal of the petition for reconsideration stands, and the lien claimant may still pursue its claim in the proper case or file a new lien.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantWCJ OrderLabor Code Section 5900Aggrieved PartyCompromise and ReleaseLien ConferenceADJ NumbersWCABVacate Order
References
0
Case No. ADJ7331340
Regular
Sep 07, 2012

JAKE VU vs. MOLINA HEALTH CARE CENTER, TRAVELERS

The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's order dismissing his workers' compensation case. The applicant claimed he did not understand he was dismissing his case when he signed the dismissal order on the same day he dismissed his attorney. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition as untimely, as it was filed over three months after the dismissal order was served. While the petition was dismissed, the Board advised the applicant that he could file a new application for adjudication of claim within the statutory period if he wished to pursue his claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalIn pro perNotice of Dismissal of Attorneyuntimely petitionjurisdictionLabor CodeInformation and Assistance OfficeApplication for Adjudication of Claim
References
4
Case No. ADJ7626694
Regular
Oct 03, 2011

NARKEITHIA TATE vs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY; EMPLOYMENT AND HUMAN SERVICES

This case involves applicant Narkeiithia Tate's petition for reconsideration of a Notice of Intention to Order Dismissal. The WCJ initially ordered dismissal due to the applicant's failure to appear at her deposition and multiple conferences. The applicant claimed she was absent due to a family emergency and lack of knowledge about the deposition. The Appeals Board dismissed her petition for reconsideration because the initial notice was not a final order. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion, deeming the petition a timely objection, and returned the case to the trial level for a new judge to determine good cause for her absences.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to Order DismissalFailure to AppearDepositionWCAB ConferencesGood CauseRemovalAdministrative Law JudgeFinal Order
References
4
Case No. POM 0264727POM 0267166
Regular
Aug 19, 2008

CELIA MUNOZ vs. THE TOWN CLUB, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY/GAB ROBINS

Here's a summary of the provided case excerpts: In *Fiducia*, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration and found applicant sustained industrial injuries but had failed to attend medical exams and hearings, leading to dismissal for good cause. The Board vacated the prior dismissal and remanded for further development of the record, acknowledging that the applicant's failure to attend examinations and hearings warranted dismissal. However, due to lack of current medical evidence, the Board vacated the dismissal and returned the case to the trial level to allow applicant to attend examinations and hearings. In *Munoz*, the defendant sought reconsideration of an order vacating submission and returning the case to the trial calendar to further develop the evidentiary record concerning a lien claimant's charges. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as it was not from a final order and denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of irreparable harm or significant prejudice. The Board emphasized that interlocutory orders to further develop evidence are not subject to reconsideration.

WCABindustrial injurypsycheTMJnasal traumateethblood pressuredismissalgood causetemporary disability
References
12
Case No. ADJ9734483, ADJ9502727
Regular
Oct 08, 2015

JUAN PALMA vs. CORNERSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an applicant whose case, ADJ9502727, was inadvertently dismissed due to a clerical error when he filed a dismissal petition for a duplicative case, ADJ9734483. Although the applicant's petition for reconsideration was untimely and therefore dismissed, the Appeals Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the erroneous dismissal order for ADJ9502727, finding it caused significant prejudice and was a correctable clerical mistake. The matter is now returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseADJ9502727ADJ9734483WCJremovalclerical erroruntimely petitionrescinded order
References
5
Case No. ADJ833288 (LBO 0385383)
Regular
Jan 29, 2016

MARTIN VALDEZ vs. NATURE'S TREE SERVICE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant sought reconsideration of an order taking the case off calendar, arguing their attorney was not properly served with prior dismissal notices. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because an order taking a case off calendar is interlocutory and not a final order subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, the Board denied the request for removal, stating the applicant had not shown substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The applicant must address the prior dismissal order at the trial level before seeking appellate review.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOff Calendar OrderDismissal OrderSubstitution of AttorneysLack of ProsecutionService of ProcessInterlocutory OrderFinal Order
References
9
Case No. 2015-06-0423
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 13, 2016

Black, James v. Prestige Group, LLC

This Order of Dismissal concerns an initial hearing held on July 11, 2016, where employee James Black, who was self-represented, failed to appear. Attorney Michael Haynie, representing the employer Prestige Group, LLC, informed the Court that he had not heard from Mr. Black since a prior Expedited Hearing Order. Consequently, Mr. Haynie made a verbal motion to dismiss the case. The Court found the motion well-taken, dismissing Mr. Black's claim for benefits under the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act with prejudice. Additionally, the order taxes the $150 filing fee to Prestige Group, LLC and mandates the filing of a statistical data form.

DismissalFailure to AppearWorkers' Compensation ClaimsInitial HearingMotion to DismissSelf-Represented EmployeeFiling FeeStatistical Data FormRight to AppealAppellate Procedure
References
3
Case No. ADJ3835561 (GOL 0099475)
Regular
Jul 12, 2011

CESAR HERNANDEZ vs. J.D. HUMANN LANDSCAPING, INC., NATIONAL LIABILITY AND FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN COMMERCIAL CLAIMS ADMINISTRATORS

The defendant sought reconsideration of an order setting aside a compromise and release, alleging the order was ex-parte and issued without notice. However, the defendant later withdrew its petition, explaining it was unaware of lien claimant correspondence and had since negotiated a resolution for attorney fees. The Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration and remanded the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This action allows for reinstatement of the original compromise and release and approval of the negotiated stipulation for attorney fees.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Setting Aside Order Approving Compromise and ReleaseEx-parteLien ClaimantEstate of Michael StevensStipulation and AwardAttorney FeesRemandTrial Level
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 42,138 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