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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
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. ADJ17569878
Regular
Apr 28, 2025

Marvin Pineda Contreras vs. Southwest Plastering, Inc.; Zenith Insurance Company

Lien Claimant Oracle Imaging Riverside sought reconsideration of an Order Dismissing Lien issued on December 23, 2024, by the WCJ, following its alleged failure to object to a notice of intention to dismiss. Oracle contended it had not received proper notice of the hearing date, attributing this to the Appeals Board not sending notifications to its P.O. Box. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as premature, returning the matter to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the Petition as one seeking to set aside the Order Dismissing Lien. The Board noted that any aggrieved party may seek reconsideration after the WCJ issues a subsequent decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantNotice of IntentionFailure to AttendProper NoticeBad AddressReport and RecommendationCompromise and Release AgreementOrder Approving Compromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ4653913
Regular
Jan 14, 2011

BERTHA GARCIA vs. UNITED FOOD GROUP, CRUM & FORSTER, PACIFIC COMP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration. The petition sought to challenge a WCJ's Notice of Intention to Dismiss the lien, arguing it was improperly issued without a hearing. The WCAB found the Notice of Intention to Dismiss was not a final order subject to reconsideration. Additionally, the petition lacked the required verification under Labor Code section 5902. The WCAB instructed the WCJ to treat the filing as an objection to the notice.

WCABLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DismissInterlocutory OrderFinal OrderLabor Code § 5900Labor Code § 5902VerificationBoard Rule 10562(e)(1)
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. ADJ4124248
Regular
Jan 16, 2018

MATEO BARDALES vs. SUPERIOR CONSTRUCTION, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claimant. The claimant argued due process was violated due to lack of notice. The Board found no proof of service for notices of hearing or intention to dismiss, supporting the claimant's position. Consequently, the dismissal order was rescinded, and the matter was returned for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienDue Process ViolationNotice of Intention to DismissProof of ServiceEAMSLien ConferenceWCJ OrderRescind OrderReturn to Trial Level
References
Case No. ADJ1981214
Regular
May 13, 2019

BEVERLY PEREZ vs. STANFORD UNIVERSITY, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Disqualification and dismissed her Petition for Reconsideration of an order taking the matter off calendar. The Board granted removal because the WCJ incorrectly concluded the case was dismissed, as the applicant had filed a timely objection to a Notice of Intention to Dismiss. The case is returned to the trial level to determine the adequacy of the applicant's response to the Notice of Intention.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ OrderNotice of Intention to DismissWCAB Rule 10582Declaration of Readiness to ProceedMeet and ConferOrder Taking Matter Off Calendar
References
Case No. ADJ7507238
Regular
Dec 27, 2011

GERARDO SANCHEZ vs. MARVIN ENGINEERING COMPANY, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) order appointing a regular physician to examine the applicant. The defendant argued this order was improper and would cause prejudice. The WCAB found the defendant's petition for reconsideration and removal was without merit, upholding the ALJ's decision to appoint a physician to address deficiencies in existing medical reports. The WCAB determined that the defendant failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or substantial prejudice to warrant removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Appointing Regular PhysicianLabor Code Section 5701Medical Legal ExamPermanent DisabilityApportionmentAlmaraz/GuzmanQualified Medical Evaluator
References
Case No. ADJ8868906
Regular
Feb 22, 2016

MICHELLE CANCHOLA vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration that was dismissed because it was filed from a non-final order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) clarified that reconsideration is only available for final orders that determine substantive rights, liabilities, or threshold issues. An interlocutory procedural decision, such as a notice of intent to dismiss a lien for failure to appear at a conference, is not a final order. While the petition was dismissed, it will be considered as a timely objection to the notice of intent to dismiss.

Petition for ReconsiderationNon-final orderFinal orderSubstantive right or liabilityThreshold issueInterlocutoryProcedural decisionsEvidentiary decisionsLien claimantNotice of Intent to dismiss
References
Case No. ADJ1462684 (SBR 0332199) ADJ4330124 (SBR 0332208) ADJ2350306 (SBR 0333426) ADJ6736405
Regular
Dec 13, 2011

ISABELA AGARONYAN vs. REGENTS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

This case involves defendant's challenge to the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) appointment of a new physician, Dr. Watkin, after prior medical reports from Dr. Kuschner were deemed not substantial evidence. The WCAB dismissed the petition for reconsideration, finding it challenged an interim procedural order, not a final decision. The petition for removal was denied because the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm from the appointment of Dr. Watkin. The Board affirmed the WCJ's discretion to appoint a new physician to develop a substantial medical record, especially given concerns about the adequacy of Dr. Kuschner's previous reports.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeSpecial PhysicianRegular PhysicianPanel Qualified Medical ExaminerSubstantial Medical EvidenceJoint LetterBias
References
Showing 1-10 of 10,436 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