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. ADJ2349671 (LAO 0787649) ADJ678557 (POM 00245222) ADJ767632 (POM 00245221)
Regular
Apr 19, 2010

BLAS MARIN vs. WEST COAST COMMUNICATIONS, and CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY

Applicant Blas Marin's petition for reconsideration of the Compromise and Release (C&R) is denied as untimely filed, though issues regarding fraud in the C&R execution can be pursued via a petition to reopen for good cause. Lien claimant Southern California Mental Health & Assessment Centers/Azadeh Rahimi, Ph.D.'s petition for reconsideration is granted because the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) improperly disallowed the lien without following proper procedure. The WCJ's order disallowing the lien is rescinded, and the matter is returned for further proceedings. Applicant's counsel was substituted on January 22, 2010, rendering previous filings by former counsel invalid.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBlas MarinWest Coast CommunicationsContinental Casualty CompanyCNA Claim PlusGallagher Bassett ServicesADJ2349671ADJ678557ADJ767632Petition for Reconsideration
References
11
Case No. ADJ12405860; ADJ7255430; ADJ7241349
Regular
May 06, 2025

Callie Merkerson vs. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Applicant Callie Merkerson and defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, administered by State Compensation Insurance Fund, both sought reconsideration of a Joint Findings and Awards (F&A) dated October 23, 2024. The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition but granted the defendant's petition, rescinding the original F&A and substituting a new decision. The substituted decision incorporated the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's recommendations, addressing clerical errors, clarifying permanent disability rates, and affirming findings related to industrial injuries to the bilateral wrists and psyche, relying on the medical opinions of QMEs William Campbell, D.O., and Anish Shah, M.D.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardsRight Shoulder InjuryPsyche InjuryBilateral WristsCarpal Tunnel SyndromeLabor Code Section 4658(d)Industrial Disability LeavePermanent Disability Indemnity
References
12
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. ADJ1534095 (LAO 0820188)
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

PAMELA MCMILLIN vs. XEROX CORPORATION; ACE USA, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing its lien was untimely filed. Because the original petition was untimely, the administrative law judge lacked jurisdiction to rescind the dismissal order. Therefore, the Board rescinded the judge's order and dismissed the lien claimant's petition, leaving the original dismissal order in effect.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Rescinding DecisionLien ClaimLien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06JurisdictionUntimely FilingCompromise and ReleaseWCJ
References
1
Case No. ADJ7703859
Regular
Aug 01, 2016

ELAINE CONNOR vs. SIERRA COUNCIL ON ALCOHOL AND DRUG DEPENDENCE, CARE WEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's order that found no Labor Code section 132a discrimination. The applicant's petition primarily focused on a potential attorney's fee award for a deposition under Labor Code section 5710, which the original order did not address. The WCJ's report recommended granting reconsideration to award the requested attorney's fees, acknowledging the omission was inadvertent. The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition, amending the order to include the $1,557.50 attorney's fee award, and otherwise affirmed the original findings. The Board also dismissed the defendant's improper supplemental petition and denied their petition for sanctions against applicant's counsel.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code 132aLabor Code 5710WCJAttorney's FeesDeposition FeesPetition for SanctionsWCAB Rule 10848Supplemental Filing
References
1
Case No. ADJ2217160
Regular
Jul 16, 2012

ALICIA NEGRETE vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, MARRIOTT CLAIMS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendants' petition for reconsideration because a crucial document, their First Amended Petition for Penalties, was missing from the EAMS record. This missing petition was referenced in their petition for reconsideration and is essential for a complete understanding of the case. The Board will dismiss the defendants' petition for reconsideration unless they provide a copy of the referenced document within 15 days. All future filings must be sent directly to the Appeals Board Commissioners' office, not district offices or EAMS.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationFirst Amended Petition for PenaltiesCosts and SanctionsEAMSNotice of Intention to DismissAdmitted EvidenceStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After Reconsideration
References
2
Case No. AHM 0135423
Regular
Mar 10, 2008

REYNA VENEGAS vs. DIVERSIFIED STAFFING SOLUTIONS, PARA

This case involves two petitions for reconsideration: one from the applicant, Reyna Venegas, and one from the defendant, Diversified Staffing Solutions. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has denied the applicant's petition and dismissed the defendant's petition. The WCAB also corrected a clerical error in the underlying decision's heading, substituting "Workers' Compensation Appeals Board" for "Division of Workers' Compensation."

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeJudicial AuthorityOriginal JurisdictionDelegation of Judicial PowersTrialInitial DeterminationReconsiderationApplicant
References
0
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. ADJ2501619 (OAK 0286955)
Regular
Nov 10, 2008

JAMES BRADFORD vs. MCMILLAN BROS. ELECTRIC, INC., PACIFIC EAGLE INSURANCE CO./tpa SEABRIGHT INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the defendant's petitions for reconsideration, removal, and stay of execution. The petition for reconsideration was dismissed as untimely because it was filed with the Appeals Board more than 25 days after the arbitrator's decision. The Board also lacked jurisdiction to grant the petition for removal or stay of execution, as these actions are not permitted for an arbitrator's decision in a Labor Code section 3201.5 carve-out case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for Stay of ExecutionUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 3201.5Carve-out CaseArbitrator's DecisionJurisdictionAppeals Board Rule 10865
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 19,066 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