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. ADJ8619288
Regular

ZUSSETTE MORALES vs. MAYA CORPORATION, CAPITAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration and removal of an Order Taking Off Calendar (OTOC). The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the OTOC was not a final order. Treating the petition as a request for removal, the Board denied it, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. This is because the lien claimant's lien was stayed under Labor Code section 4615, precluding further proceedings on the lien and related issues.

Order Taking Off CalendarPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code Section 4615Automatic StayLien ClaimantStatute of Limitations DefensePetition for Costs and SanctionsFinal OrderInterlocutory Order
References
Case No. ADJ8183477
Regular
Jan 14, 2016

DOLORES MOSELEY vs. NOIA RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, INC., ICW GROUP/INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Dolores Moseley's petition for reconsideration. The petition was untimely as it sought reconsideration of an award made over a year prior to filing. Furthermore, the petition was unverified and lacked specificity regarding the issues and legal arguments. Finally, the orders Moseley sought to reconsider were either vacated or deemed non-final procedural decisions, rendering the petition moot.

Labor Code Section 132aPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeOrder Dismissing PetitionOrder Vacating Trial DateStipulations with Request for AwardTimelinessJurisdictionalVerification
References
Case No. MON 0212034
Regular
Mar 14, 2008

KRISTIAN VON RITZHOFF vs. OGDEN ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the applicant's petition, deeming it an improper reconsideration of a non-final order. The WCAB construed the applicant's request as a petition for removal, which it denied, upholding the WCJ's discretion to prohibit videotaping of proceedings. The decision emphasizes that a party's right to videotape hearings is within the WCJ's sound discretion and not a guaranteed right.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalRequest for Judicial NoticeVideotape ProceedingsWCJ DiscretionFinal OrderSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmVacating Order
References
Case No. ADJ3882107
Regular
Oct 04, 2012

PETER ARCARESE vs. LAW OFFICES OF MANUEL H. MILLER, STATE FARM CALIFORNIA, WC CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Peter Arcarese's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The petition was also dismissed as consecutive, attempting to relitigate issues previously addressed after a prior dismissal. Furthermore, the request for removal was denied as Arcarese failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Consequently, the Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration and denied removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightInterlocutory OrderDismissed PetitionPetition for RemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmInadequate RemedyWrit of Review
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. ADJ7860537
Regular
May 05, 2017

RICKY MCNEILL vs. MARINA SHIPYARD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of an order approving a settlement for a medical lien. The defendant argued the lien claimant's provider was indicted for fraud, triggering an automatic stay under Labor Code section 4615. The WCAB found the petition timely and, absent contrary evidence, rescinded the order to allow the trial judge to determine if the stay applies. The matter was returned for further proceedings on the applicability of the statutory stay.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationStipulation and Order to Pay Lien ClaimLabor Code Section 4615Automatic StayIndictment for FraudVoid OrderTimeliness of PetitionWCAB Rule 10507Rescind Order
References
Case No. ADJ8743098
Regular
Feb 07, 2017

REGULO HERNANDEZ AGUILAR vs. PRIMA PIZZA d/b/a DOMINOS PIZZA, HANOVER INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration and denied their petition for removal. The defendant sought to overturn an order compelling the deposition of their claims adjuster, arguing it was intended to harass. However, the WCAB found the order was an interlocutory procedural decision, not a final order subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, the defendant failed to demonstrate the extraordinary circumstances required for removal.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ Orderdepositionclaims adjusterPetition to QuashPetition to Compelfinal orderinterlocutory order
References
Case No. RDG 0119112, RDG 0119113
Regular
Aug 04, 2008

CHARLES D. PINEDA vs. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY BAKERSFIELD, SEDGWICK CLAIMS SERVICES, BAKERSFIELD HEALTH DEPARTMENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final procedural order denying a stay and continuance. The Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no extraordinary circumstances or showing of significant prejudice. The case will return to the trial level to proceed with the scheduled trial.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeMinute OrderTrial DateStay of ProceedingsChange of VenueConflicts of InterestVexatious LitigantInterlocutory Order
References
Case No. ADJ9274305
Regular
Dec 15, 2014

SALVADOR REYES vs. AVP&H A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Salvador Reyes's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory order, not a final decision. The Petition for Removal was dismissed as moot, as the underlying issue regarding a specific Qualified Medical Examiner appeared to be resolved. Both petitions were denied as they did not address substantive rights or liabilities. The order reflects standard practice for non-final and moot petitions.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityMootnessQMEOrder to CompelMeet and Confer
References
Showing 1-10 of 15,464 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