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. ADJ3688325 (SBR 0323875) ADJ1445844 (SBR 0323876) ADJ4577184 (SBR 0323877)
Regular
Sep 22, 2009

MARIA FUENTES vs. WAKEFIELD ENGINEERING, AIG COSTA MESA, LUMBERMEN'S MUTUAL CASUALTY CO.

This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of an order that reinstated a prior workers' compensation award. The defendant argued the order erroneously reinstated the award after it was dismissed from one of the underlying cases and was not given due process. The Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petition, finding the order at issue was not a final order and thus not subject to review under Labor Code section 5900. Furthermore, the Board denied a petition for removal, concluding the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, as it remains liable under the joint award and can seek contribution from another insurer.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Setting Aside Findings and AwardVocational Rehabilitation BenefitsQualified Injured WorkerSpecific InjuryCumulative TraumaInsurance CoverageParty Defendant
References
7
Case No. ADJ6532010
Regular
Oct 20, 2010

JONI LITTLE vs. ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP INC.

The defendant sought reconsideration of an order that reinstated a lien claimant's dismissed lien, arguing the lien claimant's petition was untimely. The Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petition, finding the order reinstating the lien was not a final order as it did not substantively determine liability. The Board also denied the defendant's petition for removal, finding no showing of irreparable harm or prejudice justifying this extraordinary remedy. The lien claimant will still need to prove their case on the merits, and the defendant can present their arguments at further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardreconsiderationremovallien claimantadministrative law judgeCompromise and ReleaseNotice of Intentrescinded orderfinal ordersubstantive right
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
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. ADJ7407927; ADJ7407928
Regular
Mar 12, 2013

JOSE PEDRO SOTO vs. MARATHON INDUSTRIES, INC., HARTFORD INSURANCE CO. OF THE MIDWEST

This case involves defendant Marathon Industries' petitions to rescind orders that reinstated dismissed liens. The WCJ had rescinded the dismissals, finding lien activation fees were paid timely or were not required. However, the Appeals Board ruled that the lien claimants failed to prove prior timely payment of activation fees as required by statute and regulations. Therefore, the Board granted the petitions, rescinded the reinstatement orders, and reinstated the original orders dismissing the liens with prejudice.

WCABRemovalPetition for RemovalLien DismissalLien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06(a)(4)WCAB Rule 10859Administrative Director Rule 10208(a)EAMSPrior Timely Payment
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Patrick Butler General Contractor, Inc. v. Rocco

Patrick Butler General Contractor, Inc. and Patrick Butler appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, which granted summary judgment dismissing their complaint for breach of contract. The plaintiff, a licensed home improvement contractor, was fired by the defendants during a renovation project in Nassau County. The defendants claimed the plaintiff used unlicensed subcontractors, leading to the dismissal of the complaint. The appellate court dismissed Patrick Butler's appeal but reversed the order for Patrick Butler General Contractor, Inc. It ruled there was a factual dispute regarding whether the workers hired by the plaintiff were independent contractors requiring licenses or employees exempt under Nassau County Administrative Code, thereby reinstating the complaint.

Breach of ContractSummary JudgmentHome Improvement ContractorsUnlicensed SubcontractorsEmployee-Employer RelationshipAppellate ReviewContract DisputeNassau County Administrative CodeCPLRReinstatement of Complaint
References
9
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. ADJ11635947
Regular
Mar 25, 2020

EDMOND WOODS vs. CONTEMPORARY SERVICES CORPORATION, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

Applicant petitioned for reconsideration of a Minute Order that stated "WCJ to issue dismissal without prejudice." The Appeals Board dismissed the petition because the applicant was not aggrieved by a final order, as no such order had yet been issued. A petition for reconsideration can only be taken from a final order that determines substantive rights, liabilities, or a fundamental threshold issue. Since the dismissal order itself had not yet been issued, the petition was premature and thus dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalAggrieved ApplicantFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueBenefitsWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McNally v. Workers' Compensation Board

The petitioner appealed an order dismissing his petition for nunc pro tunc approval of a personal injury settlement. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the petition due to an inability to determine if the respondent Uninsured Employers Fund was prejudiced by the settlement or if the settlement terms were reasonable, citing insufficient information about the other defendant's insurance coverage or assets. The appellate court unanimously reversed this order, reinstated the petition, and remitted the matter to Supreme Court for further proceedings, including a hearing if necessary, to assess the reasonableness of the settlement terms. Additionally, the appellate court granted the petitioner leave to amend the petition to request vacatur of the stipulation of discontinuance in the underlying action and granted that request, thereby vacating the stipulation.

Appellate LawCivil ProcedurePersonal InjurySettlement ApprovalNunc Pro TuncStipulation of DiscontinuanceVacaturRemandUninsured Employers FundPrejudice
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 28,087 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