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. ADJ9202952
Regular
Nov 05, 2018

MARIA LOPEZ vs. KELLERMEYER BERGENSON SERVICES, LLC, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The WCAB dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration of an Order Vacating, finding the order was not a final decision. However, it granted the defendant's Petition for Removal of that same Order Vacating, deeming it untimely under WCAB Rule 10859. Consequently, the WCAB vacated the Order Vacating, restoring the original July 5, 2018 Findings of Fact. The WCAB also dismissed the lien claimant's Petition for Removal, affirming the July 5, 2018 Findings of Fact which held the lien claimant bound by prior causation findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder VacatingFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeLien ClaimantSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmFinal Order
References
0
Case No. ADJ6876456
Regular
Jan 27, 2010

MARILYN BROWN vs. COLLECTCORP CORPORATION, HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final order denying a motion to dismiss. The WCAB also dismissed the defendant's Petition for Removal as untimely, as it was filed more than 20 days after the order it challenged. Furthermore, the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, which is required for removal. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal were dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeLabor Code $\S 5405$JurisdictionDue ProcessFinal OrderTimelinessCalifornia Code of Regulations
References
5
Case No. ADJ15495436
Regular
Feb 18, 2025

Calvin Grigsby vs. Grigsby and Associates, State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered two petitions from the applicant, Calvin Grigsby: a December 9, 2024 Petition for Reconsideration and/or Removal, and a December 24, 2024 Petition for Removal. The Board dismissed the reconsideration aspect of the December 9th petition as it pertained to non-final orders and denied removal, finding no demonstration of irreparable harm. The subsequent December 24th petition was also dismissed as it challenged the same December 4, 2024 orders. The Board also noted the applicant's failure to comply with page limits for the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalNonfinal OrdersLabor Code Section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionsSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmSupplemental Pleadings
References
15
Case No. ADJ9237152
Regular
Aug 19, 2014

MIRNA ROBLES vs. RUSSAKS CURED AND SMOKED PRODUCTS, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed within the statutory 25-day period after the Order Approving Compromise and Release. The Board also dismissed the Petition for Removal, finding it untimely and lacking grounds for removal as the judge's order was interlocutory and did not cause irreparable harm. Interlocutory procedural orders are not subject to reconsideration or removal as they do not determine substantive rights or liabilities.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightIrreparable HarmTimely-FiledOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseWCJVan Nuys District Office
References
11
Case No. ADJ7247114
Regular
Aug 15, 2013

ARMANDO SANTOS ELIZONDO vs. CROKETT GRAPHICS aka GARED GRAPHICS, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL/ WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Armando Santos Elizondo's Petition for Removal of a prior dismissal order. The WCAB clarified that removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only when substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will occur and reconsideration is inadequate. Here, the dismissal order was a final order subject to reconsideration, and the petition was untimely. Therefore, the petition for removal was dismissed, though the applicant may still seek to set aside the order within five years of the injury date.

Removal petitionOrder of DismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardExtraordinary remedySubstantial prejudiceIrreparable harmReconsiderationUntimely petitionPetition to set asideDate of injury
References
2
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. ADJ10270511, ADJ10458415
Regular
Apr 03, 2023

BERLEAN LEEDY vs. ESKATON PROPERTIES, INC., ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration and removal. The WCAB found that the applicant's petition challenged non-final interlocutory orders, which are not subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, the petition for removal was untimely as it was filed more than 25 days after the challenged medical examination order. The WCAB also dismissed removal regarding a later minute order as it contained no appealable decisions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Compelling Attendance at Medical ExaminationMinutes of HearingFinal OrderInterlocutory Procedural OrderThreshold IssueTimeliness of FilingService by Mail
References
4
Case No. LBO 0297361
Regular
Nov 28, 2007

ANTHONY TENNISON vs. NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES, CIGA by its servicing representative, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, for Reliance Insurance, in liquidation

The Appeals Board dismissed petitions for reconsideration and removal challenging an order compelling the applicant's wife to attend a continued deposition. The pro se petition was dismissed as untimely and unverified, while the attorney's petition was dismissed because discovery orders are not final and thus not subject to reconsideration. The Board affirmed the WCJ's order, finding the wife waived her marital privilege by appearing and testifying, and cautioned parties about potential sanctions for their behavior.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removaldepositionmarital privilegechild care reimbursementdiscovery orderinterlocutory orderfinal orderuntimely petition
References
12
Case No. ADJ8807200
Regular
Oct 24, 2014

RAFAEL ANGUIANO vs. NICK'S CABINET DOORS, ZURICH NORTH AMERICAN INSURANCE

This case involves a defendant's unverified Petition for Removal challenging a WCJ's order denying dismissal for lack of prosecution. The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition due to the unverified filing. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion, rescinded the WCJ's prior order, and returned the case to the trial level. This action was taken because neither the applicant's attorney's objection nor the defendant's Declaration of Readiness to Proceed effectively activated the case for the purpose of avoiding dismissal under Rule 10582.

Petition for RemovalLack of ProsecutionRule 10582Declaration of Readiness to ProceedPetition to DismissNotice of Intention to DismissVerification DefectUnverified PetitionRescinded OrderReturned to Trial Level
References
2
Case No. ADJ7226408
Regular
Feb 16, 2012

Robert Thompson vs. VONS, A SAFEWAY COMPANY

Defendant Vons sought removal and reconsideration of a WCJ's order authorizing applicant's attorney to accept $3,000 for a diminished future earning capacity expert. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration, finding the order interlocutory and not a final determination of substantive rights, nor was defendant directly aggrieved. The petition for removal was also dismissed as untimely regarding the reservation of jurisdiction in a prior award and because defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. Ultimately, both the Petition for Removal and Petition for Reconsideration were dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationStipulated AwardDiminished Future Earning CapacityDFEC ExpertOgilvie IssueJurisdiction ReservedInterlocutory Order
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 28,166 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