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. ADJ7793819 ADJ8527743 ADJ7742174
Regular
Jun 06, 2013

EVERETT JOHNSON vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION, CORVEL

The Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration as moot because the order sought to be reconsidered was rescinded pending a decision on the applicant's petition to set aside the Compromise and Release. The defendant's Petition for Removal was also denied as they were not currently aggrieved. The matter is returned to the WCJ to hear and rule on the applicant's Petition to Set Aside Order Approving Compromise and Release. The defendant may seek reconsideration after a final order on the settlement is issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalCompromise and Releaseattorney feesWCJset aside ordermisrepresentationfraudcumulative trauma
References
0
Case No. ADJ6966334
Regular
Jan 12, 2012

WALTER CADENA vs. UNITED CARRIER, APPLIED RISK SERVICES

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of an order compelling a deposition, arguing it violated a prior consolidation order. The Board dismissed the reconsideration petition as the Minute Order was not a final decision. However, the Board granted removal to allow Associate Chief Judge Kahn to clarify if his prior consolidation order applied to the deposition. The deposition order is suspended pending ACJ Kahn's review and advisement within 20 days.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder of Consolidation for DiscoveryAdministrative Law JudgeAssociate Chief JudgeMinute OrderDepositionLien ClaimantsDiscovery Matters
References
4
Case No. ADJ1554760 (LAO 0871820)
Regular
Mar 17, 2010

AGAPITO PEREZ vs. COOSEMANS LA, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) sought reconsideration and removal of an order to set a trial, arguing it was erroneously served and not the proper party for a specific injury date. However, the Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the order was not a final decision, and therefore not subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, the Board denied the petition for removal, finding that CIGA failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or substantial prejudice, and incorporated the WCJ's report by reference. The matter was also moot as the trial was taken off calendar due to the pending petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationHIH in liquidationPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removaladministrative law judgeorder setting for trialfinal ordersubstantive rights and liabilitiesmoot petition
References
3
Case No. ADJ8206944
Regular
Dec 31, 2013

KEVIN IXCOY COGUOX vs. AROMA BAKERY AND CAFÉ, FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for removal and reconsideration of an order imposing sanctions on a lien claimant for failing to pay a lien activation fee. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for removal as it was not the proper procedural remedy. However, construing the petition as a request for reconsideration, the Board granted it. Due to uncertainty regarding a federal court's preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the lien activation fee provisions, the Board rescinded the sanctions order. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, pending a final federal court determination on the fee's enforceability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay SanctionsLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Labor Code section 5813Landmark Medical ManagementHealthcare Finance Managementpreliminary injunction
References
1
Case No. ADJ8942890 ADJ8942898
Regular
Jan 03, 2013

JOSE TORRICO vs. THE ANDREW LAUREN CO.; AIG CLAIMS

The Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a final order. The Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal as it did not demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion due to an invalid Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) issued by the WCJ while a petition was pending. The Board vacated the OACR and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings to resolve all outstanding issues in both case numbers.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalInterlocutory OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightIrreparable HarmCompromise and ReleaseOACRWCJ JurisdictionVoid OACR
References
8
Case No. ADJ7144283
Regular
Feb 04, 2015

RALPH LOYNACHAN vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involved an applicant's petition for removal, seeking to address penalties for delayed treatment, which the WCJ denied due to a pending lien conference. The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition, finding it failed to meet the extraordinary standards for removal, especially since a status conference request was inappropriate with a scheduled hearing. The defendant's subsequent notice, construed as a removal or disqualification petition, was dismissed as untimely. The Board found the defendant's notice to be without merit, admonishing counsel against future similar filings.

Petition for RemovalAppeals BoardWCJ GutierrezPenalties and SanctionsDelay of TreatmentCatastrophically Injured WorkerPetition for DisqualificationUntimely PetitionLabor Code Section 5311WCAB Rule 10452
References
2
Case No. SJO 253163
Regular
Jul 07, 2008

REHAN SHIEKH vs. CISCO SYSTEM, INC., CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICES

The applicant's petitions for reconsideration and removal were dismissed because the Workers' Compensation Judge had not yet issued a final order or decision on the applicant's discovery and attorney fee petitions. As no aggrieved party has suffered prejudice or irreparable harm from a non-existent ruling, reconsideration and removal are statutorily improper at this procedural stage. The Appeals Board noted that the applicant's premature filings have further delayed the resolution of the pending issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJLabor Code § 132aindustrial injurysoftware engineerright anklepsychediscrimination
References
11
Case No. ADJ9799351
Regular
Oct 04, 2016

NERY BETSABE CASTANEDA GUZMAN vs. CEDARLANE NATURAL FOODS, SENTRY INSURANCE

The applicant's petition for reconsideration of the dismissal of case ADJ9799351 is denied due to repeated failure to appear at depositions and a conference, even after a notice of intention to dismiss was issued. The applicant's contention that this dismissal also affected cases ADJ10273840 and ADJ10273841 is rejected, as those cases are distinct and pending in a different district office. Therefore, the appeals board dismissed the petition for reconsideration regarding ADJ10273840 and ADJ10273841 and denied it for ADJ9799351.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseWCJNotice of Intention to DismissFailure to AppearDepositionsPriority ConferenceGood CauseCommunication Issues
References
2
Case No. ANA 390998
Regular
Jan 24, 2008

EDWARD VERA vs. GULFSTREAM AEROSPACE/GENERAL DYNAMICS, AIG administered by BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order was procedural and not a final determination of substantive rights, thus not subject to reconsideration. The Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm justifying the extraordinary remedy. The WCJ's order deferred findings on permanent disability and the admissibility of certain medical evidence pending further reports and evaluations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalIndustrial InjuryBilateral Carpal Tunnel SyndromeMedical TreatmentPermanent DisabilityPrimary Treating DoctorAdmissibility of Medical ReportsInterlocutory Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ2321404 (MON 0309679)
Regular
May 15, 2009

GENERAL SMITH vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; Permissibly Self-Insured, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order to proceed to trial is not a final order. The WCAB also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCJ had previously overruled the applicant's objection to setting the case for trial after it had been pending for over four years with multiple prior court appearances. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's reasoning that removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice, which was not demonstrated here.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJMandatory Settlement Conferencediscoverynew injurycardiovascular injuryincomplete recorddevelop the record
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 14,550 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