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. ADJ4013684 (OAK 0307613) ADJ620772 (OAK 0294537)
Regular
Jul 28, 2014

DANIEL GRANZELLA vs. RICHMOND SANITARY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration and denied their petition for removal. The defendant sought to be relieved from an agreed medical examiner (AME) agreement with Dr. Warbritton, alleging bias and ex parte communication. The Board found that the WCJ's order denying the motion to be relieved from the AME agreement was interlocutory and thus not subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, the Board found no basis for removal, as the defendant failed to establish bias or irreparable harm, and their ex parte communication claim was waived by their delay in raising the issue after receiving further medical reports.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)BiasEx Parte CommunicationLabor Code § 5900Interlocutory OrderFinal OrderSubstantive Right
References
11
Case No. ADJ8935493
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

CYNTHIA LANDSIEDEL vs. SANTA ANA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case involved an applicant seeking reconsideration or removal of a WCJ's decision denying bariatric surgery or a weight loss program for an industrial back, neck, and leg injury. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal, finding it an inappropriate remedy as a final order existed and reconsideration was available. The Petition for Reconsideration was denied because the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof that the requested surgery was reasonably required to cure or relieve the industrial injury. Additionally, the petition was subject to dismissal due to improper verification, which was not cured despite notice.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryBariatric SurgeryWeight Loss ProgramMedical TreatmentUtilization ReviewBurden of ProofEvidentiary Burden
References
5
Case No. ADJ1595121 (ANA 0369848) ADJ3409041 (ANA 0368368)
Regular
Jul 09, 2018

Victoriano Valadez, Marcos Arellano vs. Progressive Business Corporation, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Removal as untimely filed. The petition sought to overturn an order relieving the applicant's attorney, which occurred over eight months prior to the filing. While the Board would have denied the petition on its merits had it been timely, it emphasized that the WCJ's prior order relieving counsel was not a final determination of substantive rights. The WCAB also clarified that claims of attorney misconduct and requests for case files must be raised before the WCJ.

WCABPetition for RemovalOrder Relieving Attorney of RecordPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingIncarcerated ApplicantGraiwer & KaplanLLPWithdrawal of CounselProcedural Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ2340102 (LAO 0751270) ADJ4406096 (LAO 0784412)
Regular
Sep 16, 2016

JOSE MORFIN vs. WHITE MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, ADVENTIST HEALTH

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration and dismissed a petition for removal. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the employer is liable for treatment of a non-industrial condition if it is reasonably required to cure or relieve the effects of the industrial injury. The petition for removal was dismissed because reconsideration was the appropriate remedy.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code 4600medical treatmentcure or relievenon-industrial conditioncompensable consequenceAppeals Board Rule 10843final order
References
6
Case No. ADJ4271541 (LBO 0393859)
Regular
May 15, 2014

DANILO YAP vs. LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER & POWER

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's Order Vacating the prior order relieving counsel was not a final order. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding the applicant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm from the order. Applicant contended his attorney's withdrawal and alleged misconduct by both parties' counsel prejudiced his case. The WCAB concluded no extraordinary circumstances justified removal and applicant could seek reconsideration after a final order.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Vacating OrderAttorneys of RecordLaw Offices of George HendersonWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFinal OrderSubstantive RightIrreparable Harm
References
5
Case No. ADJ17477426
Regular
Jul 28, 2025

GEORGENIA BROCKS vs. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES

Applicant Georgenia Brocks filed a Petition for Removal concerning a Stipulated Award, alleging duress. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board treated the petition as one for reconsideration. The Board determined that the petition for reconsideration was premature, as it sought to challenge an interlocutory decision rather than a final order. Consequently, the Board dismissed the petition and remanded the matter to the trial level. The WCJ is instructed to treat the petition as one to set aside the order and to clarify the situation regarding the applicant's attorney's petition to be relieved as counsel.

Petition for ReconsiderationStipulated AwardPetition for RemovalPetition to Set AsideLabor Code Section 590960-day periodTransmission of CaseEAMSFinal OrderInterlocutory Order
References
14
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. Misc. No. 254
En Banc
Jan 20, 2012

Applicant vs. Respondent

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Daniel Escamilla's Petition for Change of Venue, denied his Request for an Immediate Stay, but granted his Petition for Removal. The decision affirmed the relieving of his counsel and continued the hearing to provide a final opportunity to obtain new counsel.

Petition for Change of VenuePetition for RemovalRequest for Immediate Stay of ProceedingsWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)Relief of CounselDue ProcessQuasi-Criminal NatureLabor Code Section 5501.6Labor Code Section 4907
References
1
Case No. ADJ7768905
Regular
Sep 13, 2016

TRACEY LOMBARDI vs. SCRIPPS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition, which sought disqualification of the administrative law judge, removal, and reconsideration. The disqualification petition was denied as untimely, filed after the swearing of the first witness. The removal petition failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Finally, the reconsideration petition was dismissed because it did not seek review of a final order, but rather an interlocutory procedural decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5311Appeals Board Rule 10452Untimely PetitionExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
6
Case No. ADJ739610 (SAC 0333601)
Regular
Jun 19, 2009

MAXIMILIANO RAMIREZ vs. MB BUILDING CONTRACTORS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND INSURED RIVERSIDE

Applicant sought reconsideration to be relieved of a stipulation regarding the start date for permanent disability indemnity increases, arguing a subsequent panel decision justified it. The Board denied applicant's petition, holding that a change in legal interpretation post-stipulation does not constitute good cause to set aside negotiated agreements. The Board granted defendant's petition to correct a clerical error in the attorney's fee amount, amending it from $113,451.03 to $111,029.13. The original Findings and Award were otherwise affirmed.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardStipulationGood CausePermanent DisabilityAttorney's FeeClerical ErrorLabor CodeWCJ
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 14,187 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