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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Masao X. v. Francis Z.

This case involves appeals from two Family Court orders. The first order denied the petitioner's application for the return of his children to his custody, a proceeding initiated against the Rensselaer County Department of Social Services. The second order dismissed the petitioner's application for visitation with his children. The Family Court dismissed the custody petition because DSS had not held custody since 1987, and dismissed the visitation petition based on the best interests of the children, noting the petitioner's conviction for murder and his current incarceration. The appellate court affirmed both dismissals, concluding that the petitions were untimely and inappropriate, and that visitation would not be in the best interests of the children.

Custody disputeVisitation rightsFamily Court Act Article 10Family Court Act Article 6Child welfareParental incarcerationBest interests of the childAppellate reviewDismissed petitionTimeliness of appeal
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 17, 1968

In re Male Child Wilkov

In a contested adoption proceeding, the natural mother appealed an order from the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated December 17, 1968. The order had concluded that she abandoned her infant child, dismissed her application for the child's return, rejected her objection to the proposed adoption, and directed the court clerk to proceed with the adoption application. The appellate court affirmed the order, despite noting an error by the trial court regarding a social worker's communication. The trial court mistakenly believed the natural mother spoke with a hospital social worker, when in fact, the social worker had only conversed with the child's grandmother. However, the appellate court found that there was ample independent evidence to support the abandonment finding, irrespective of this factual dispute.

Adoption LawChild AbandonmentFamily Court AppealParental RightsSuffolk County Family CourtAppellate AffirmationSocial Worker TestimonyFactual ErrorEvidentiary SupportChild Custody
References
1
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. ADJ9625941
Regular
Oct 15, 2015

DANIEL BORGSTROM vs. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed both the applicant's and defendant's petitions for reconsideration, as they were taken from non-final interlocutory orders concerning a discovery dispute over deposing the Chief of Police. The applicant's petition for removal was dismissed as moot because the WCJ rescinded the order denying the deposition, thereby allowing it. Finally, the defendant's petition for removal was denied, as they failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and liberal discovery for the fair resolution of cases was favored.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder RescindingDepositionChief of PoliceDiscovery DisputeNon-final OrderInterlocutory OrderDue Process
References
10
Case No. ADJ4343203
Regular
Feb 06, 2015

PEDRO CABALLERO (DECEASED) vs. CONTINENTAL PUMPING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a deceased applicant whose death was determined by an Agreed Medical Evaluator to be unrelated to his industrial injury. The defendant sought dismissal of the claim, but the WCJ initially included a provision requiring all liens to be resolved first. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no statutory basis to delay dismissal pending lien resolution, especially since lien claimants were properly served and did not object. The Board amended the Notice of Intent to Dismiss, removing the lien resolution requirement, and ordered the Application for Adjudication of Claim dismissed.

Petition for RemovalSkeletal PetitionNotice of Intent to DismissAgreed Medical EvaluatorDismissal for Failure to ProsecuteLien ClaimantsApplication for Adjudication of ClaimWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryCause of Death
References
0
Case No. ADJ10239649
Regular
Sep 02, 2016

, Applicant, vs. , Defendants.

The applicant's Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed as untimely because it was filed over twenty days after the Order Approving Compromise and Release. However, the Board returned the case to the trial level to determine if the applicant's claims of fraud regarding his employer's identity and insurance coverage constitute good cause to set aside the original settlement order. The applicant alleged he was misled into settling based on false information about his employer's insurance status. The Board acknowledges these allegations, if proven, could justify setting aside the order.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseuntimelyFraudSet Aside OrderJoinderDeclarative JudgmentGood CauseInequitableMistake
References
13
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. ADJ3344826
Regular
Nov 09, 2010

RONALD FRYER vs. CORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY MARKET, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding an order to authorize medical treatment and pay bills, as well as dismissing the applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued the WCJ erred in ordering reimbursement for bills not following Utilization Review, while the applicant claimed further wrongdoing and sought an award of benefits. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, denying the defendant's petition, and dismissed the applicant's petition as untimely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderMedical Treatment AuthorizationPrimary Treating PhysicianMedical Provider NetworkGym MembershipIndustrial InjuryUtilization ReviewApplicant
References
2
Case No. ADJ6471197, ADJ6471198
Regular
Sep 13, 2013

GRACIELA CASTRO vs. SHADE HOTEL, FARMERS INSURANCE

This case was dismissed because the Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration was based on an interlocutory order, not a final decision on substantive rights or liabilities. The Board clarified that reconsideration is only permitted for final orders under Labor Code section 5900. As there was no order dismissing the Applicant's lien, the Applicant was not aggrieved by a final decision. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightsLiabilitiesDismissedAggrievedLienADJ6471197
References
3
Case No. ADJ1358822
Regular
Aug 26, 2008

FRANCISCO RAMIREZ vs. TANIMURA & ANTLE, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY, Administered By CNA CLAIMS PLUS, BENDT & VALENTINE, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB dismissed defendant Zenith's petition for removal (moot as the WCJ issued a decision), dismissed applicant's petition for reconsideration (interlocutory order), and denied applicant's petition for removal (no significant prejudice). The case was returned to trial level for further proceedings.

Valley FeverAgreed Medical ExaminerPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationAOE/COELabor Code section 4628substantial evidenceinterlocutory procedural ordersdiscretionary remedysignificant prejudice
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 30,650 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