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. ADJ6916857
Regular
Feb 27, 2015

JERUSALINA FIGUEIRA vs. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The applicant sought penalties for delayed permanent disability payments, arguing that the employer failed to pay a 10% penalty on the remaining award plus an additional 25% penalty. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) recommended denying the petition, finding that Labor Code sections 4650(d) and 5814 penalties do not apply when the extent of injury or permanent disability is disputed. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) adopted the ALJ's report and denied the petition, also admonishing the applicant's attorney for improper petition filing.

ADJ6916857Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportLabor Code § 4650(d)Labor Code § 5814permanent disabilityaccepted injurydisputed injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ9173159
Regular
Dec 09, 2016

GARY COTTLE vs. TONY'S EXPRESS, CALIFORNIA TRUCKERS' SAFETY ASSOCIATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior administrative law judge's (WCJ) order. This order addressed penalties for unreasonable delay in payment and sanctions for bad faith litigation. Crucially, the WCAB has not received a petition for reconsideration from defendant CTSA and requires them to submit a copy of their petition and proof of timely filing within 20 days. Failure to comply will result in the WCAB proceeding with only the applicant's petition.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5814Unreasonable DelayCompensation PaymentLabor Code Section 5813Bad Faith LitigationLienTimely FiledProof of Service
References
0
Case No. ADJ3904838 (LBO 0377238)
Regular
Jun 20, 2015

EDWARD MORSE vs. CONWAY WESTERN EXPRESS, INDEMNITY INSURANCE, CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICE COMPANY

This case involves cross-petitions for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision regarding an injured truck driver. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition to correct a clerical error, increasing the third-party credit from $179,001.50 to $199,001.50. The Board denied the applicant's petition regarding penalties for failure to provide medical treatment, deferring the issue until the application of the credit is determined. The original decision found the applicant sustained industrial injuries to multiple body parts and systems and awarded penalties against the defendant were not warranted.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryTruck DriverNeck InjuryBack InjuryShoulder InjuryKnee InjuryUpper Extremity Injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ7981413; ADJ2876358
Regular
Jun 03, 2025

LORI WILLIAMS vs. WEBCOR BUILDERS, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

Applicant Lori Williams filed a petition to disqualify WCJ Elizabeth Dehn, alleging bias due to inexperience, ignored medical treatment requests, and lack of penalties. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) considered the petition and the WCJ's report. The WCAB, adopting the WCJ's report, denied the petition, citing that the petition lacked detailed facts under penalty of perjury as required by WCAB Rule 10960 and failed to establish grounds for disqualification under Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641(f) and (g). The WCJ stated that no rulings were made on medical treatment or penalties during the status conference, and denied any bias.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJ DisqualificationLabor Code 5311Code of Civil Procedure 641BiasEnmityUnqualified OpinionAffidavitsDeclaration Under Penalty of PerjuryVerified Allegations
References
8
Case No. ADJ4152685
Regular
Oct 23, 2013

FLORIDA SILVA vs. RIOS FARM LABOR SERVICES, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Florida Silva's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the denial of her claim for attorney's fees and penalties. The denial stemmed from the applicant's failure to formally petition for penalties or raise attorney's fees and costs as issues during the Mandatory Settlement Conference or trial. The board found that the SJDB voucher issue became moot when it was eventually provided, and without a formal petition for penalties, there was no basis for an award of fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Displacement Job BenefitSJDB voucherunreasonable delayLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyRios Farm Labor ServicesLabor Code section 5814.5attorney's feespenalties
References
0
Case No. ADJ2217160
Regular
Jul 16, 2012

ALICIA NEGRETE vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, MARRIOTT CLAIMS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendants' petition for reconsideration because a crucial document, their First Amended Petition for Penalties, was missing from the EAMS record. This missing petition was referenced in their petition for reconsideration and is essential for a complete understanding of the case. The Board will dismiss the defendants' petition for reconsideration unless they provide a copy of the referenced document within 15 days. All future filings must be sent directly to the Appeals Board Commissioners' office, not district offices or EAMS.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationFirst Amended Petition for PenaltiesCosts and SanctionsEAMSNotice of Intention to DismissAdmitted EvidenceStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After Reconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ16243827
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

MICHAEL STONEBARGER vs. SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES

Applicant sought removal of an Order Denying Petition for Change of Venue, alleging bias from a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The defendant did not file an answer to the petition, and the PWCJ recommended denial. The Appeals Board denied the petition for removal, concluding that the applicant failed to show substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Furthermore, the Board dismissed the petition for disqualification, finding it lacked sufficient factual allegations under penalty of perjury and documentation of irreparable harm to establish disqualification.

RemovalDisqualificationPetition for RemovalPresiding Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJ BiasSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5311Code of Civil Procedure Section 641
References
23
Case No. ADJ358912 (GRO 0032620) ADJ1583814 (GRO 0032621)
Regular
Jun 21, 2010

ROSS COVELLO vs. CITY OF SANTA MARIA, Pecmissibly Self-Insured, GREGORY BRAGG & ASSOCIATES, Adjusting Agency

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the PWCJ's order setting the matter for trial was not a final order. The Board denied the applicant's request for removal, finding no showing of significant prejudice or irreparable harm justifying this extraordinary remedy. Additionally, the petition for disqualification was denied due to the applicant's failure to provide the required affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury. The applicant's contentions regarding discovery, notice defects, counsel conflicts, and bias were found insufficient to warrant reconsideration or removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationPresiding Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeDeclaration of ReadinessAgreed Medical ExaminerDiscovery ClosedMandatory Settlement ConferenceFinal Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ11447249; ADJ11447255
Regular
Dec 07, 2020

IDALIA PEREZ vs. FOREVER 21, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE, BROADSPIRE

This case involves Idalia Perez's petitions for removal and disqualification against Forever 21 and its insurer, Ace American Insurance. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both petitions. The Board found that Perez failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm required for removal, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. Regarding disqualification, the Board determined the petition was untimely and lacked sufficient factual basis, specific allegations of bias, or a declaration under penalty of perjury as required by statute.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJJudicial DisqualificationLabor Code Section 5311Code of Civil Procedure Section 641Substantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
3
Case No. ADJ2736625 (OAK 0345167) ADJ6471430
Regular
Jul 21, 2010

Reginald Scott vs. California Department of Corrections, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves applicant Reginald Scott's petition for reconsideration of a prior Appeals Board decision that modified his permanent disability award and vacated penalties against the defendants. Scott argued the Board erred in determining Labor Code section 4658 does not apply to inmates and that penalties should have been imposed. However, the Appeals Board dismissed Scott's petition as untimely. The Board found that Scott's petition was filed after the 25-day jurisdictional deadline, even with an extension for a weekend closure. Therefore, the Appeals Board lacked the power to consider the merits of his arguments and dismissed the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and DecisionFindings and AwardPermanent Disability AwardLabor Code section 4658InmatesPenaltiesUntimely PetitionJurisdictional Time Limit
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 14,672 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