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. ADJ8283873
Regular
Jun 07, 2016

DANIEL CRUZ vs. BROWN SHOE COMPANY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed in error, mistakenly addressing an order that did not exist. The Board also denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from the Administrative Law Judge's order dismissing the defendant's own petition to dismiss for lack of prosecution. The dismissal of the defendant's petition was appropriate and the Board's actions are affirmed.

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing PetitionLack of ProsecutionRule 10582Application for AdjudicationPetition for Order Compelling AttendanceMedical ExaminationQME
References
0
Case No. ADJ7172643; ADJ7172641
Regular
Apr 02, 2012

JUSTIN MILLER vs. PF CHANGS CHINA BISTRO, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves an applicant whose workers' compensation claims were dismissed by the WCJ for lack of activity and prosecution. The applicant sought reconsideration, arguing due process violations and non-compliance with dismissal procedures. The Appeals Board denied the petition, finding the applicant's objections vague and lacking specific reasons for the lack of prosecution despite ample opportunity. A dissenting opinion argued that the dismissal constituted an abuse of discretion as the applicant had indicated an intention to prosecute the claim.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Order Dismissing Applicationswithout prejudicePetition for Dismissallack of activity and prosecutionNotice of Intent to Dismiss Applicationsobjections overruleddue process rights violatedCalifornia Code of Regulations title 8 section 10582
References
0
Case No. ADJ3992440 (SBR 0339508)
Regular
Nov 23, 2011

LOUIE M. GONZALES vs. MOBILE MINI, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's Minute Order was not a final order, as it did not dispose of substantive rights. Additionally, the Board denied the defendant's petition for removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm as required for such an extraordinary remedy. The WCJ had previously denied the defendant's petition to dismiss for lack of prosecution without prejudice, allowing it to be resubmitted in one year. The defendant sought reconsideration based on alleged new circumstances regarding the applicant's parole violation.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition to Dismiss for Lack of ProsecutionIncarcerated ApplicantParole ViolationIncompetent while incarceratedFinal OrderSubstantive Rights and LiabilitiesSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
5
Case No. ADJ7588271
Regular
Jan 27, 2014

ADOLFO ALCEDA vs. GARDNER TRUCKING, INC., NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for removal as it pertained to a final order, not an interlocutory matter. The Board also denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's decision to rescind a dismissal for lack of prosecution. This rescission was granted because the applicant was not properly served with the dismissal notice due to an incorrect address in the EAMS system. The WCAB found that the applicant's objection to the dismissal, citing delayed doctor's reports due to retirement, constituted good cause.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Rescinding DismissalLack of ProsecutionVoid ab initioGood CauseUntimelyPetition to VacateDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedInterlocutory Orders
References
3
Case No. ADJ10456118
Regular
Mar 18, 2019

RANDI QUINTELL vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The applicant sought reconsideration of an order dismissing her workers' compensation case for lack of prosecution, arguing she was homeless and did not receive notice. While the Board dismissed her petition for reconsideration as the order was not final, it granted removal of the case. The Board found that the applicant would suffer prejudice if the dismissal stood without addressing her lack of notice claim due to homelessness. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Dismissing CaseLack of ProsecutionIn Pro PerActual NoticeHomelessnessWithdrawal of CounselProof of Service
References
7
Case No. ADJ300431 (FRE 0203618) ADJ1896245 (FRE 0203619) ADJ3576423 (FRE 0203620)
Regular
Jan 14, 2014

Sherrill Perkins vs. Fresno Unified School District

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for removal but granted her petition for reconsideration. Applicant's 40-page petition for reconsideration violated the 25-page limit and lacked good cause for exceeding it. Therefore, the Board will dismiss the petition unless a compliant one is refiled within ten days, while simultaneously addressing the attorney's separate fee reconsideration. The Board found no extraordinary circumstances to justify removal and will proceed with reconsideration after compliance with filing rules.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardWCJcumulative traumatemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityapportionmentpenalties
References
2
Case No. ADJ1067975
Regular
Aug 03, 2010

BLANCA GUTIERREZ vs. PHILLIP & INGE BOSKOVICH, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for removal filed by Garo Tchakian, D.C., who claimed to be a lien claimant. The petition sought to overturn an order that prevented the lien claimant from prosecuting their lien until their deposition was completed. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because there was no evidence that Dr. Tchakian had actually filed a lien in the case. As an unfiled lien claimant, Dr. Tchakian was not a party to the proceedings, and thus the WCAB lacked jurisdiction over their discovery disputes.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalLien ClaimantVoid Ab InitioJurisdictionDiscovery OrdersUnverified PetitionAdministrative Law JudgeEAMSDeposition
References
0
Case No. ADJ10662340
Regular
May 15, 2019

ANDREW DICKSON vs. PARTY CITY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was untimely, filed 35 days after the WCJ's order instead of within the 20-day limit. The petition was also unverified, a defect applicant failed to correct after the WCJ noted it. Furthermore, the petition violated WCAB rules by attaching previously filed documents and using a font size smaller than 12 points. Even if considered on the merits, the WCAB would have denied it, agreeing the original case dismissal for lack of prosecution was proper.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalUntimely FilingUnverified PetitionLack of ProsecutionWCAB RulesAdministrative Law JudgeOrder Denying ObjectionSet Aside Order
References
7
Case No. ADJ3505181 (POM 0262203)
Regular
Mar 26, 2019

DANIEL HERRERA vs. ROBERT HARMAN & ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES, MCKELVEY, BELLWOOD LAUNDRY & LINEN, CROTHALL LAUNDRY SERVICE; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded an order dismissing the applicant's case for lack of prosecution. The dismissal occurred because the applicant's objection to the dismissal petition was allegedly not properly filed with the EAMS system, despite being mailed to the District Office. The WCAB found sufficient evidence in the applicant's petition and supporting documents to warrant a hearing on the merits of the dismissal. The case is returned to the trial level for the judge to set a hearing and consider the dismissal petition.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseLack of ProsecutionEAMSPetition for Dismissal for Lack of Diligent ProsecutionNotice of Intention to DismissObjection to DismissalRescindedReturned to Trial Level
References
1
Case No. ADJ9089648
Regular
Apr 08, 2016

Abraham Nunez Matos vs. San Francisco Giants, Ace American Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, overturning a WCJ's denial of a dismissal petition. The defendant argued the WCJ erred by considering a settlement conference as an activation event, which improperly prevented dismissal for lack of prosecution under Rule 10582. The Board found significant prejudice to the defendant due to the applicant's persistent failure to cooperate with discovery, including missing a court-ordered deposition. Consequently, the case was remanded to the WCJ for a hearing on the defendant's Petition to Dismiss.

Petition for RemovalWCAB Rule 10582Declaration of Readiness to ProceedMandatory Settlement ConferencePetition to DismissFailure to ProsecuteDiscovery CooperationProfessional AthleteCumulative InjuryStatute of Limitations Defense
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 18,456 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