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. ADJ7845980
Regular
Oct 18, 2011

STEPHEN ZIMMERMAN vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the applicant's pro per petition, staying the Stipulations and Award and returning the matter for further proceedings. The Board dismissed the former attorney's petition as moot and will allow applicant to argue the stipulation was entered into under duress and without full knowledge of his rights. The Board also noted ambiguities in the stipulation regarding the cervical MRI and the need to address temporary disability indemnity.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationStipulations and AwardMedical Provider Network (MPN)DuressTemporary Disability IndemnityExpedited HearingDeclaration of Readiness (DOR)Continuity of CareGood Cause
References
4
Case No. ADJ19479057
Regular
Aug 26, 2025

GERALD TORRES vs. PRO DEO FOUNDATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Defendant, Pro Deo Foundation and State Compensation Insurance Fund, petitioned for reconsideration of a WCJ's decision, which found Gerald Torres to be an employee of Pro Deo Foundation. Defendant contended Torres was a volunteer or independent contractor and should be judicially estopped from claiming workers' compensation due to a prior settlement. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's finding of employment, emphasizing the WCJ's credibility determinations and concluding that the defendant failed to satisfy the 'ABC' test for independent contractor status. The Board timely acted on and subsequently denied the petition for reconsideration.

Workers' CompensationPro Deo FoundationState Compensation Insurance FundGerald TorresADJ19479057Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersEmployee StatusVolunteerIndependent Contractor
References
7
Case No. ADJ3507926 (MON 0335218)
Regular
Mar 04, 2013

Douglas Maida vs. GEP Entertainment Services, AIG Claim Services, Inc.

The applicant's attorney sought to withdraw from representation due to a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship, primarily stemming from the applicant's frustration over a credit issue. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's order denying withdrawal was not a final order. However, the Board granted the petition for removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and allowed the attorney's withdrawal. The case is returned to the Presiding Judge to address the unresolved credit issue, potentially through a settlement conference with the applicant appearing in pro per.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJWithdrawal of AttorneyCumulative TraumaStipulations with Request for AwardPermanent DisabilityCreditThird Party Case
References
0
Case No. ADJ7157224
Regular
Sep 12, 2011

NORMA NERI vs. KRISPY KREME DOUGHNUTS, TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE, SEDGWICK CMS/SRS

This case involves Norma Neri's pro per petition for reconsideration of an approved Compromise and Release agreement. Her petition was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board because it was unverified, unsigned, and failed to state the grounds for reconsideration. The Board noted that Labor Code section 5902 requires verification of such petitions and that applicant had not cured this defect despite notice. Therefore, the Board found good cause to dismiss the petition.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and Releaseunverified petitionunsigned petitionLabor Code section 5902verification defectLucena v. Diablo Auto Bodygrounds for reconsiderationmaterial evidence
References
1
Case No. LBO 0297361
Regular
Nov 28, 2007

ANTHONY TENNISON vs. NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES, CIGA by its servicing representative, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, for Reliance Insurance, in liquidation

The Appeals Board dismissed petitions for reconsideration and removal challenging an order compelling the applicant's wife to attend a continued deposition. The pro se petition was dismissed as untimely and unverified, while the attorney's petition was dismissed because discovery orders are not final and thus not subject to reconsideration. The Board affirmed the WCJ's order, finding the wife waived her marital privilege by appearing and testifying, and cautioned parties about potential sanctions for their behavior.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removaldepositionmarital privilegechild care reimbursementdiscovery orderinterlocutory orderfinal orderuntimely petition
References
12
Case No. ADJ3964372 (MON 0247784) ADJ4081926 (MON 0247785)
Regular
Dec 07, 2018

ROBERT BAKER vs. CITY OF COMPTON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant Robert Baker's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed *in pro per* without proof of service on all adverse parties, including his own attorney. The petition also failed to meet the requirements of Appeals Board Rule 10856 by not providing a specific offer of proof for newly discovered evidence or fraud. Consequently, the Board found the petition defective on multiple grounds.

Petition for Reconsiderationin pro perJoint Order Approving C&RWCJAppeals Board Rule 10856newly discovered evidenceoffer of proofcumulative evidenceproof of serviceadverse parties
References
3
Case No. ADJ12634746
Regular
Nov 07, 2025

BLANCA ARRIOLA vs. OAK VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, BETA HEALTHCARE GROUP

The applicant, Blanca Arriola, filed a pro per Petition for Reconsideration on August 25, 2025, challenging a decision from June 20, 2025, despite being represented by counsel. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found the petition to be untimely, as it exceeded the 25-day statutory limit for filing. Consequently, the Board dismissed the petition due to lack of jurisdiction. The decision also clarified recent amendments to Labor Code section 5909 concerning the Appeals Board's 60-day action period and notification requirements for case transmission.

Petition for ReconsiderationPro Per FilingUntimely PetitionLabor Code § 5909Appeals BoardTransmission of CaseElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Case EventsProof of ServiceReport
References
9
Case No. ADJ9800793
Regular
Oct 06, 2016

TRAVIS TIDWELL vs. PRO TRAFFIC SERVICES, COMPANION PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

In Tidwell v. Pro Traffic Services, the applicant, Travis Tidwell, petitioned for reconsideration of a July 12, 2016 decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues. This allows the Board to gain a complete understanding of the record for a just decision. All future filings related to the petition must now be submitted directly to the Commissioners' office in San Francisco, not district offices or e-filed.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardTravis TidwellPro Traffic ServicesCompanion Property and Casualty Insurance CompanyIntercare PasadenaSan Diego District OfficeStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned Decision
References
0
Case No. ADJ16913929
Regular
Oct 24, 2025

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Nidya Gonzalez and defendant Sizzler USA Acquisition, Inc., insured by Preferred Employers Insurance Company, both sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings of Fact and Award (F&A) from February 27, 2025, which found applicant sustained a cumulative injury with 95% permanent disability. Defendant contended the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and post-termination defense, and that Dr. Rubanenko's reports lacked substantial medical evidence, while applicant contended a miscalculation in permanent disability. The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition, finding the claim was not barred and Dr. Rubanenko's reports constituted substantial medical evidence. The Board granted the applicant's petition, amending the F&A to set applicant's earnings at $1,272.03 per week, resulting in a temporary and permanent total disability rate of $848.20 per week, and increasing the permanent disability to 100% based on an age adjustment correction and the application of the Vigil decision regarding overlapping impairments.

Statute of LimitationsCumulative TraumaDate of InjuryPost-Termination DefenseSubstantial Medical EvidenceAMA GuidesPermanent Disability RatingPetition for ReconsiderationEarningsVocational Injury
References
23
Case No. ADJ1959622 (AHM 0143618) ADJ3555484 (AHM 0143619)
Regular
Feb 14, 2011

KAI-SEN TSAI vs. SUN SALES LA, INC., UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFIT TRUST FUND, Rosa Lam

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Rosa Lam's petition for reconsideration of an approved Compromise and Release because it was filed untimely. Lam, acting "in pro per" despite being represented by counsel, alleged fraud, non-industrial causes, witness credibility issues, and ineffective assistance of her attorney who allegedly coerced her into signing the settlement. The Board found the petition was filed 29 days after the order, exceeding the 20-day jurisdictional deadline. Even if timely, the Board would have denied it, as ineffective assistance of counsel is not grounds to set aside an order and no undue influence was demonstrated.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSun Sales LAInc.Uninsured Employers Benefit Trust FundRosa LamPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseIn Pro PerFraudulent ClaimsNon-Industrial Causes
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 14,854 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