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. ADJ6711975
Regular
Aug 05, 2013

DIONICIO REYES vs. FILOMENA D'AMORE, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition to vacate an order dismissing their lien for failure to pay an activation fee. The petition was untimely, filed 59 days after the order was served. The Board also granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions due to the petition's untimeliness and multiple misrepresentations of fact. The Board is considering imposing a $500 sanction against the lien claimant's representative.

Lien ClaimantPetition to Vacate OrderLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Untimely PetitionRemoval on Own MotionNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Misrepresented Material FactsWCAB Rule 10842(a)
References
0
Case No. ADJ8204664
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

MARIA MUNOZ vs. FLOREZ FAMILY, INC. dba McDONALD'S RESTAURANT

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of an interlocutory order by a WCJ regarding the proper selection of a medical panel. The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration, finding that interlocutory orders are not subject to reconsideration. Additionally, the Board granted removal on its own motion due to the defense attorney's failure to respond to a notice of intent to impose sanctions. Consequently, the defense attorney was ordered to pay a $100 sanction to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSanctionsDefense AttorneyFindings and AwardFindings and OrderLabor Code section 4062.2Labor Code section 5900Interlocutory OrderRemoval
References
8
Case No. ADJ7181189
Regular
Feb 21, 2014

MERVATTE ZAIT vs. ST. MARY INVESTMENTS, INC., dba IDEAL HOME CARE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the lien claimants' petition as it was improperly filed from a non-final letter, not an order. The Board granted removal on its own motion to address sanctions. The lien claimants' representatives, Qualified Billing and Collections, LLC and Diego S. Plasencia, were sanctioned $1,000 jointly and severally for filing a frivolous petition and causing a waste of judicial resources.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsFrivolous PetitionNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsObjectionGood CauseLabor Code Section 5813WCAB Rule 10561
References
0
Case No. ADJ8521155
Regular
Sep 02, 2014

VICENTE AGUILAR vs. U-TURN SEVEN CORPORATION, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and denied the petitions for reconsideration filed by Employers Compensation Insurance Company and Star Insurance Company. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's report, finding Star's petition contained inflammatory and intemperate language that impugned the integrity of the WCJ and the Board. Consequently, the WCAB granted removal on its own motion and issued a notice of intent to sanction Star and its attorney for approximately $1,500 due to these statements.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVicente AguilarU-Turn Seven CorporationEmployers Compensation Insurance CompanyStar Insurance CompanyFindings and Awardcumulative injurybilateral handswristsarms
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stockschlaeder & McDonald, Esqs. v. Kittay (In Re Stockbridge Funding Corp.)

Appellant law firm Stockschlaeder & McDonald appealed an order from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, which found them guilty of civil contempt and imposed sanctions for failing to turn over debtor's documents and violating an automatic stay. The District Court affirmed the bankruptcy court's finding of civil contempt, citing clear and convincing evidence of the firm's noncompliance and lack of diligence regarding the turnover orders. However, the court vacated the civil contempt sanctions, reasoning that coercive sanctions cannot be applied after compliance, and the fixed fine effectively functioned as a criminal contempt sanction requiring due process protections not met. The District Court also upheld the bankruptcy court's determination that Stockschlaeder & McDonald violated the automatic stay by improperly releasing and recording mortgage assignments post-petition. Consequently, the order was affirmed in part and vacated in part.

Civil ContemptBankruptcy AppealAutomatic Stay ViolationSanctionsTurnover OrderLaw Firm LiabilityDebtor's EstateCoercive SanctionsCriminal ContemptDue Process
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bell Aircraft Corp. v. Siegler

The court affirmed both the final and intermediate orders without costs in this matter. The case primarily involved an appeal from an order that had found several defendants guilty of criminal contempt of court. Additionally, the appeal also addressed an order which denied a motion seeking to resettle an order of commitment. Furthermore, a motion to vacate and perpetually stay the orders of commitment was also denied. All presiding judges concurred with the decision.

Criminal ContemptOrder of CommitmentResettlement MotionVacate MotionStay OrdersAppellate ReviewOrder AffirmedJudicial Concurrence
References
1
Case No. ADJ6859570
Regular
Nov 04, 2013

GERSON RODRIGUEZ vs. VENTURI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., WAUSAU UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE CO.

This case involves a lien claimant who failed to file a timely response to a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions. The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and, instead, granted removal to itself. The Board found the lien claimant's response to be untimely, even when considering electronic filing, and thus imposed the maximum sanction of $2,500.00 jointly and severally against the lien claimant and its representatives.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSanctionsRemovalLien ClaimantElectronic Adjudication Management SystemLabor Code Section 5310Administrative Law JudgePetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to Impose Sanctions
References
0
Case No. ADJ2543755 (LAO 0831288)
Regular
Oct 26, 2015

HERIBERTO ARGUETA vs. MILLENNIUM MULTISPECIALTY MEDICAL GROUP, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

Pinnacle Lien Services' petition for reconsideration was granted because the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) lacked personal jurisdiction over Pinnacle when sanctions were imposed. The WCAB found that Pinnacle was never properly joined as a party nor given adequate notice of the proceedings leading to the sanctions. Despite this finding, the WCAB intends to impose a sanction on Pinnacle for failing to timely address the wrongly issued order, which wasted WCAB resources. Therefore, the prior order imposing sanctions on Pinnacle is rescinded, but Pinnacle faces potential new sanctions for its delay.

Pinnacle Lien ServicesPetition for ReconsiderationPetition to Set AsideLabor Code section 5804jurisdictionpersonal jurisdictiondue processNotice of Intent to SanctionJoint Findings and Ordersremoval
References
4
Case No. ADJ3113473
Regular
Sep 29, 2014

PAMELA JACKSON vs. WEST COAST SIGNS, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded a prior sanctions order, and issued a new order imposing reduced sanctions of $500 against a lien claimant and its representative. The claimant's representative mistakenly believed the applicant's case was resolved based on an outdated EAMS entry, leading to the premature filing of a Declaration of Readiness and subsequent failure to appear at a lien conference. While acknowledging the filing and non-appearance errors, the Board reduced the sanctions from $1,500 to $500, citing the claimant's "honest mistake" in interpreting the EAMS record. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Declaration of ReadinessElectronic Adjudication Management Systemlien claimantSanctions OrderPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boardcase in chiefStipulations with Request for AwardPetition to Reopenpermanent disability
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dubinsky v. Joseph Love, Inc.

A motion seeking an order to affirm a prior order and judgment and to vacate a previous determination and order of the court was considered and denied by the judicial panel. The panel included Justices Martin, Townley, Callahan, and Peck.

Motion PracticeOrder AffirmanceJudgment AffirmancePrior DeterminationOrder VacaturJudicial Panel DecisionAppellate Review
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 24,610 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