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. ADJ15495436
Regular
Feb 18, 2025

Calvin Grigsby vs. Grigsby and Associates, State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered two petitions from the applicant, Calvin Grigsby: a December 9, 2024 Petition for Reconsideration and/or Removal, and a December 24, 2024 Petition for Removal. The Board dismissed the reconsideration aspect of the December 9th petition as it pertained to non-final orders and denied removal, finding no demonstration of irreparable harm. The subsequent December 24th petition was also dismissed as it challenged the same December 4, 2024 orders. The Board also noted the applicant's failure to comply with page limits for the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalNonfinal OrdersLabor Code Section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionsSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmSupplemental Pleadings
References
15
Case No. ADJ3808038 (LAO 0819022)
Regular
Feb 11, 2010

NICOLAS F. BENINKOFF (Deceased), LORENA BENINKOFF (Widow) vs. DARCO METAL SURFACING, INC.; and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board denied petitions for removal and reconsideration from lien claimants and the defendant, and denied the applicant's reconsideration petition. Lien claimants Kan and Ace's petition for removal was denied as they failed to show substantial prejudice, and their reconsideration petition was dismissed as the prior order was not final. The applicant's reconsideration petition was denied because her claim for home healthcare services was deemed an untimely lien claim under Labor Code section 4903.5.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalReconsiderationLien ClaimantsUntimely LienLabor Code section 4903.5Labor Code section 5405Home Healthcare ServicesMedical TreatmentTransportation Expenses
References
5
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. ADJ8213064, ADJ8222631
Regular
Jan 22, 2016

MUBINA KUSLJUGIC vs. COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FOR RETARDED & HANDICAPPED, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, ENDURANCE MARKEL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted SCIF's Petition for Reconsideration to amend the Findings, Award, and Orders to dismiss the applicant's claim for a specific back injury and correct a clerical error. SCIF's Petition for Removal, seeking WCJ disqualification, was denied as improperly filed and skeletal. The applicant's Petition for Removal regarding further development of the record was also denied, as reconsideration was deemed the appropriate remedy for a final order, and the Board found the issues properly before them. All other aspects of the original Findings, Award, and Orders were affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAgreed Medical ExaminerCumulative InjurySpecific InjuryPermanent DisabilityDiscovery MatterAttorney-Client PrivilegeCode of Civil Procedure
References
9
Case No. ADJ1524475 (RIV 0046648) ADJ4641802 (RIV 0046649
Regular
Mar 01, 2019

BONNIE L. BENTLEY vs. SORA MANAGEMENT, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOC. for Legion Insurance, In Liquidation

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration and a Petition for Removal challenging a WCJ's order vacating submission and allowing further development of the record. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order was an interlocutory procedural decision, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be inadequate. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal were dismissed and denied, respectively.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderVacating SubmissionFurther Development of RecordSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary RemedyWCJ Report
References
6
Case No. LAO 0834414
Regular
Mar 03, 2008

NATASHA FANE vs. PRIME CLINICAL SYSTEMS, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE, ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Everest's petition for reconsideration, rescinded a prior order, and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine contribution liability between Everest and Argonaut. Argonaut's petition for reconsideration was dismissed as it was not a final order, but its petition for removal was granted, rescinding an improperly issued joinder order and issuing a new order joining Argonaut as a party defendant. The Board clarified that contribution proceedings under Labor Code section 5500.5(e) can be initiated after a settlement and that Argonaut, having been notified, may not be bound by prior evidentiary records.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNatasha FanePrime Clinical SystemsInc.Everest National InsuranceArgonaut Insurance CompanyContributionLabor Code section 5500.5(b)Labor Code section 5500.5(e)Compromise and Release
References
0
Case No. ADJ6990453
Regular
Feb 07, 2011

LEE CORDAWAY vs. CITY OF FOLSOM, YORK INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was not filed from a final order, as reconsideration is only permissible from decisions determining substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, adopting the Workers' Compensation Judge's report and finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted. The petitioner failed to demonstrate why removal was necessary or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal were dismissed and denied, respectively.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
8
Case No. ADJ11616593 ADJ11616594 ADJ11616595 ADJ11616596
Regular
Nov 06, 2019

MARIA RODRIGUEZ vs. VALLARTA SUPERMARKETS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration and removal from an applicant following an administrative law judge's order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petition, deeming the ALJ's order interlocutory and not a "final" determination of substantive rights. The Board also denied the removal petition, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. Ultimately, the petition for reconsideration was dismissed and the petition for removal was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWCJ DecisionReplacement Panel QME
References
6
Case No. ADJ3545497 (VNO 0549348) ADJ2475197 (VNO 0402476) ADJ4294865 (VNO 0435139)
Regular
Jan 06, 2016

HUMBERTO ZUNIGA vs. BALFAB MANUFACTURING COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a petition for reconsideration and removal that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The petition was dismissed for reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order, but rather an interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decision. The petition was also denied for removal as it was unverified, and the petitioner failed to cure the defect or provide a valid explanation after notice. Therefore, the Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration and denied the petition for removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory Procedural OrderSubstantive Right or LiabilityThreshold IssueVerified PetitionWCJ ReportDismissal
References
6
Case No. ADJ6861886
Regular
Feb 01, 2012

Tracy Huiras vs. Nestle USA, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration, disqualification, and removal concerning a WCJ's order compelling a claims adjuster to testify at a lien trial. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as the order was not final. While the petition for disqualification was denied due to insufficient evidence of bias, the petition for removal was granted. The Board rescinded the WCJ's order compelling witness testimony, as the lien claimant bears the burden of proof and must produce their own witnesses.

WCABRemovalDisqualificationMandatory Settlement ConferenceWCJLien ClaimClaims AdjusterPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for DisqualificationPetition for Removal
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 19,743 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