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. 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. ADJ4250427 (MON 0359204)
Regular
Sep 16, 2011

ANA AGUILAR vs. METRO BUILDING MAINTENANCE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an order dismissing applicant Ana Aguilar's claim for lack of prosecution. The Board found that applicant's attorney was relieved as counsel and had lost contact with the applicant prior to the dismissal order, raising due process concerns. The dismissal order was based on a defendant's petition and a notice of intention to dismiss, but the Board found no evidence that the applicant actually received these notices. Therefore, the matter was returned to the trial level to ensure the applicant has an opportunity to be heard.

WCAB Rule 10582dismissal for lack of prosecutionex parte orderdue processlack of noticepetition for dismissalnotice of intention to dismissmotion to be relieved as counselcumulative traumamaintenance worker
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. ADJ9134227
Regular
Dec 18, 2015

VICTOR DIAZ vs. EXXEL OUTDOORS, INC.; THE HARTFORD

The applicant sought reconsideration of a dismissal order, arguing the judge failed to issue a proper notice of intent to dismiss. The Board denied the petition, finding the judge correctly amended an initial dismissal order to correct an error specifying dismissal "with prejudice" instead of "without prejudice" as initially noticed. This amendment was authorized by WCAB Rule 10859 and Labor Code 5803 to rectify a mistake and conform the order to the notice, which the applicant had not objected to. Therefore, no due process violation occurred, and the applicant received the relief sought.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Order Dismissing CaseNotice of Intention to DismissDismissal without prejudiceDismissal with prejudiceWCJWCAB Rule 10582WCAB Rule 10780WCAB Rule 10859
References
Case No. ADJ11276421
Regular
Mar 15, 2019

SABAS GAMBOA vs. FULLERTON PACIFIC INTERIORS, INC., INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The applicant sought reconsideration of an order dismissing defendant Clark Builders and others, arguing it was improper as Clark Builders was not a party. The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as untimely and from a non-final order. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion to correct the record, as Clark Builders was never properly a party. The Board rescinded the original dismissal order and issued a new order dismissing Arch Indemnity Insurance Company and Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. without prejudice.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationRemovalOrder DismissingLack of EmploymentClark BuildersArch Indemnity Insurance CompanyGallagher Bassett ServicesInc.Fullerton Pacific Interiors
References
Case No. ADJ17611095; ADJ17611096
Regular
Feb 21, 2025

ALEXANDRYA WOLFE vs. CLAIRES AND STONINGTON INSURANCE CO, GALLAGHER BASSETT

Applicant Alexandrya Wolfe sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Order of Dismissal for inactivity in two cases (ADJ17611095, ADJ17611096). Applicant argued they were receiving medical care and were ready to proceed, having filed objections to both the defendant's petition to dismiss and the WCJ's notice of intention to dismiss. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition, answer, and WCJ's report. The Board determined that the WCJ erred by dismissing the cases without properly addressing applicant's objections or setting the matter for a hearing, thereby violating due process. Consequently, the Board granted the petition for reconsideration, rescinded the Orders of Dismissal, and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.

WCAB Rule 10550Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalNotice of Intention to DismissLack of ProsecutionMedical TreatmentReady Willing AblePetition to Dismiss Inactive CaseMandatory Settlement ConferenceHearing Representative
References
Case No. ADJ9706171
Regular
Sep 14, 2018

AMPARO RUSOW vs. NUESTRA GENTE, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration as it was not from a final order. However, the WCAB granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding that both parties would suffer irreparable harm if the dismissal issue was not thoroughly adjudicated. The WCAB rescinded both the Order of Dismissal and the Order Rescinding Dismissal. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine if the applicant had shown good cause to avoid dismissal.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Rescinding Order of DismissalOrder of DismissalFailure to ProsecuteGood CauseWCJ Report and RecommendationIrreparable HarmSubstantive RightAdjudication
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. 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
Showing 1-10 of 9,765 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