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. ADJ8081723
Regular
Apr 29, 2014

BEATRIZ DELGADO vs. INDUSPAC CALIFORNIA, INC./WESTERN FOAM PACKING PRODUCTS, PINNACLE

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Applicant Beatriz Delgado. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition. The WCAB reasoned that reconsideration can only be sought for final orders that determine substantive rights or liabilities, not for interlocutory procedural orders. Pre-trial orders regarding evidence, discovery, trial setting, or venue are considered interlocutory and therefore not subject to reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial OrdersEvidenceDiscoverySetting for Trial
References
Case No. ADJ1332416 (WCK 0031685) ADJ3521523 (OAK 0322592) ADJ4017994 (WCK 0029276)
Regular
Nov 19, 2015

PAMELA ZEILSTRA vs. TARGET STORES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, rescinding the WCJ's order setting a mandatory settlement conference and deferring the request to set aside a prior order compelling medical examination attendance. The Board found that the issue of setting aside the two-year-old compelling order must be resolved before a settlement conference. Applicant must comply with the order or show good cause for setting it aside, and defendant may seek an order under Labor Code section 4053. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, starting with a status conference.

Petition for RemovalOrder Compelling AttendanceMedical ExaminationMandatory Settlement ConferenceWCJDiscoverySet Aside OrderLabor Code section 4053Rescind OrderTrial Level
References
Case No. ADJ2151255 (LAO 0804906)
Regular
Feb 11, 2013

BAIRO REYNOSO vs. VOLT SERVICE, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order setting trial was not a final order. The WCAB granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinded the trial setting order, and removed the case from the calendar. This decision was based on the defendant's argument that significant prejudice and potential irreparable harm would result from proceeding without completing the deposition of the applicant's wife, who provides home health care. The WCAB found that allowing further discovery and updated medical evaluations would serve judicial economy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Setting TrialBifurcationHome Health Care LienMandatory Settlement ConferenceAgreed Medical ExaminersSurveillance FilmDeposition of Wife
References
Case No. ADJ9310265, ADJ9563677, ADJ9805680
Regular
Dec 07, 2015

ADAM SENF vs. CITY OF VACAVILLE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order closing discovery and setting a trial date was not a final order. The WCAB also denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no significant prejudice or irreparable harm, especially given the extensive delays already caused by the defendant. The Board noted the defendant's pattern of seeking continuances and cautioned their attorney regarding potential sanctions for delaying tactics. Ultimately, the WCAB affirmed the WCJ's decision to move the case towards trial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Closing DiscoverySetting for TrialWCJFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderLabor Code section 5502(d)(1)Declaration of Readiness
References
Case No. ADJ8500075
Regular
Oct 27, 2015

RUDI QUINTEROS vs. STAMOULES PRODUCE, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought removal after the WCJ rescinded an order approving a compromise and release (C&R). The applicant claimed a "change of heart" as the basis for setting aside the C&R, which the defendant argued was insufficient grounds. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinding the WCJ's order and substituting an order suspending the C&R approval. The case was returned to the WCJ to hold a status conference to allow the applicant to present arguments for setting aside the C&R.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalCompromise and ReleasePetition to Set AsideOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseOrder Rescinding OrderGood CauseFraudMistakeUndue Influence
References
Case No. ADJ7671523
Regular
Oct 15, 2018

ALFONSO MUNGUIA vs. SBR ROOFING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely and not from a final order. However, the WCAB granted the lien claimant's petition for removal, finding that the WCJ's order disallowing the listing of all issues and arguments on the Pre-Trial Conference Statement caused significant prejudice. The WCAB rescinded the WCJ's minute order and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The claimant's industrial injury case had already been resolved by a Compromise and Release.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLien ClaimantPre-Trial Conference StatementWCJMinute Orderuntimely petitionfinal ordersubstantive right
References
Case No. ADJ1023513
Regular
Jan 26, 2015

MAXIMIANO MONJE vs. YUAN TEN NOODLE CO.; FARMERS MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The petition was dismissed because it was not signed or verified as required by Labor Code section 5902. Additionally, the WCAB found that the issue of sanctions raised in the petition was not based on a final order, as interlocutory procedural orders are not subject to reconsideration. Therefore, the WCAB found the petition defective on two grounds and ordered it dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalLabor Code section 5902VerificationSanctionsFinal OrderInterlocutory OrdersSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial Orders
References
Case No. ADJ2228296 (SAC 0351933), ADJ2470753 (SAC 0351934), ADJ8272258, ADJ8272266
Regular
Aug 12, 2013

JAMES PATTEN vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal concerning orders closing discovery and setting cases for trial. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding the defendant failed to demonstrate the necessary prejudice or irreparable harm for removal. The defendant's alternative request for reconsideration was also denied as the orders were not final and therefore not subject to reconsideration. The case is returned to the trial level for a new trial date.

Petition for RemovalLabor Code section 5310closing discoverysetting for trialsignificant prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationfinal ordersWCAB Rule 10859trial level
References
Case No. ADJ9945229
Regular
Feb 20, 2018

THERESA HAVENS vs. KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an Order for Costs, which directed the defendant to pay $\$500.00$ for a deposition. The Board found that an Order for Costs constitutes a "final" order as it determines a substantive liability for the defendant. Therefore, reconsideration was the appropriate remedy, and the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder for CostsRescinded OrderTrial LevelWCJ ReportAdministrative Law JudgeFinal OrderSubstantive LiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutory Orders
References
Showing 1-10 of 10,753 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