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. ADJ7227862
Regular
Aug 08, 2013

Amelia Flores vs. Sherrill Silk, State Farm Insurance Companies

This case involves a lien claimant, Physician Funding Solutions, LLC (PFS), seeking reconsideration after its lien was dismissed with prejudice for failing to pay the required lien activation fee. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the dismissal. The Board found PFS had ample opportunity to pay the fee after being added to the case record and before the lien conference. The claimant's argument regarding improper service of the dismissal order was also rejected as the order was non-final.

Lien activation feePetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienFailure to payWCJEAMSLien claimantProof of paymentLabor Code section 4903.06Declaration of readiness
References
Case No. ADJ1737228 (LBO 0307803)
Regular
Aug 30, 2010

THOMAS MATHENY vs. CATALINA WATER COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION Administered By XCHANGING For FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY, In Liquidation

The California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order directing the defendant to pay a lien due to defective service. The defendant argued it did not receive notice of the lien claim or the order until after the deadline to object, thus being denied due process. The Board found issues with case number referencing and service of the Notice of Intention to Pay Lien, noting the defendant had not had a proper opportunity to present its defense. Consequently, the Board rescinded the order and returned the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay LienNotice of Intention to Pay LienCompromise and ReleaseLabor Code Section 5903Official Address RecordCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationLiquidationElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
Case No. ADJ455873 (LAO 0886539)
Regular
Sep 26, 2016

JAMES TOWNSEND vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, HARBOR DIVISION

This case concerns a lien claimant, BCP Collections, Inc., seeking reconsideration of an order denying its lien for $\$8,661.87$. The initial denial was based on BCP's alleged failure to provide proof of service for its Notice of Intention to allow the lien. However, the administrative law judge later vacated this order, recognizing proof of service had been timely filed. Consequently, the Appeals Board dismissed BCP's petition for reconsideration because the rescinded order was not a final decision. As no final determination of the lien currently exists, reconsideration is procedurally improper.

BCP CollectionsNotice of IntentionProof of ServiceEAMSLien ClaimPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Allowing LienLien ConferenceRescinded OrderAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ8213513, ADJ7224783
Regular
Jun 13, 2014

JOSE OROZCO vs. WOODMASTER FURNITURE, INC., ENDURANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, SOUTHERN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of orders dismissing a purported lien claimant's lien. The Board found that the Workers' Compensation Judge lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the lien because the claimant had not actually filed a lien with the Board. Consequently, the dismissal orders were rescinded and the matter was returned for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimOrder Dismissing LienWCJLabor Code Section 4903Labor Code Section 4903.05Appeals Board Rule 10774.5Unfiled LienJurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ800698 (SRO 0128141)
Regular
Apr 25, 2012

Kevin Elliott vs. Fire Protection Unlimited, Specialty Risk

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order compelling service of medical reports was not a final order. However, construing the petition as a request for removal, the Board granted it, finding a potential untimeliness issue with the lien claimant's lien under Labor Code section 4903.5. The Board rescinded the original order and returned the case to the trial level for a lien conference to determine the existence, filing date, and validity of the lien.

Labor Code section 4903.5Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder to Compel Service of Medical Reportslien claimantRS MedicalOrder Approving Compromise and Releaseuntimely filed lienlaches defenselien conference
References
Case No. ADJ10975246
Regular
Oct 15, 2020

MAXIMILIANO VILLEGAS vs. AMETEK, INC.;, THE HARTFORD, SEDGWICK CMS

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration after their lien was dismissed for lack of prosecution. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the dismissal order, and denied the defendant's petition to dismiss. The Board found the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof, as the lien claimant did not become a party until after the underlying claim was resolved, rendering the dismissal rule inapplicable. Furthermore, no lien conference or trial had been ordered off-calendar, negating another basis for dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantLack of ProsecutionWCAB Rule 10888Declaration of Readiness to ProceedBurden of ProofOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseElectronic Adjudication Management SystemExecutive Order N-68-20Labor Code section 5909
References
Case No. LBO 354963
Regular
Nov 27, 2007

RIGOBERTO JIMENEZ vs. BLUE COLLAR, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration because it sought to review an interlocutory order, not a final decision on substantive rights. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding the lien claimant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, as required for this extraordinary remedy. Consequently, the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on the lien claim.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder VacatingInterim OrderWCJLabor Code section 5313Interlocutory OrderFinal OrderPetition to Disallow Lien
References
Case No. VNO 0486618 VNO 0486619
Regular
Feb 05, 2008

GRISELDA LEYVA vs. HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration because it sought review of an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision. The order in question voided a conditional payment order for a lien claim due to apparent service and filing issues. The Board noted that the lien claimant's rights can still be addressed at a scheduled hearing or through a subsequent filing.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder VoidingConditional Order to Pay Lien ClaimDue ProcessOfficial Address RecordInterlocutory Procedural OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiability
References
Case No. ADJ7634257; ADJ7634274
Regular
May 22, 2013

JESUS RANGEL vs. WILDFISH SEAFOOD GRILLE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., ZURICH

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case concerns lien claimant Advance Care Specialist's petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing their lien claim for failure to pay the activation fee. The lien claimant asserts payment was made prior to the lien conference, a claim the Presiding WCJ recommends further investigation into. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the dismissal order, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. This decision highlights the importance of proper service by the Appeals Board, as demonstrated by a potential issue with timely service of the original dismissal order.

Lien activation feePetition for reconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimSkeletal petitionLien conferencePresiding Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeRescinded orderRemandService of orderWCAB rule 10500(b)
References
Showing 1-10 of 9,789 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