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. ADJ8206944
Regular
Dec 31, 2013

KEVIN IXCOY COGUOX vs. AROMA BAKERY AND CAFÉ, FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for removal and reconsideration of an order imposing sanctions on a lien claimant for failing to pay a lien activation fee. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for removal as it was not the proper procedural remedy. However, construing the petition as a request for reconsideration, the Board granted it. Due to uncertainty regarding a federal court's preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the lien activation fee provisions, the Board rescinded the sanctions order. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, pending a final federal court determination on the fee's enforceability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay SanctionsLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Labor Code section 5813Landmark Medical ManagementHealthcare Finance Managementpreliminary injunction
References
1
Case No. ADJ3 439999 (WCK 0041092)
Regular
Mar 25, 2016

STEVEN LUCIDO vs. PREMIUM TOBACCO STORES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for reconsideration and denied a petition for removal. The WCAB found the petition for reconsideration improper because it was not taken from a "final" order, but rather an interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decision. Removal was also denied as the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board suggested the WCJ set a conference and advised that an overdue payment dispute should be handled through enforcement, not a new petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive Right or LiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionExtraordinary Remedy
References
6
Case No. ADJ8245512
Regular
Dec 31, 2013

SINDIA OCAMPO PEREZ vs. QUALITY STAFFING SERVICES, LUMBERMENS UNDERWRITING ALLIANCE

This case involves a Petition for Removal by a lien claimant seeking to overturn an order for sanctions imposed for failing to pay a lien activation fee. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal, stating reconsideration is the proper procedural remedy. However, construing the petition as one for reconsideration, the Board granted it. The Board rescinded the sanctions order due to uncertainty regarding the enforceability of the lien activation fee provisions following a federal court injunction and returned the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Labor Code section 4903.06Lien activation feeLandmark Medical ManagementHealthcare Finance ManagementAngelotti Chiropractic v. Baker
References
1
Case No. ADJ11375329
Regular
May 30, 2025

JOSE ALVARENGA vs. EXPRESS EMPLOYMENT PROFESSIONALS, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Jose Alvarenga's Petition for Reconsideration as premature, noting it timely acted on the petition within the statutory 60-day period. The Board is returning the matter to the trial level for the WCJ to adjudicate the petition as one seeking to enforce a prior Third Amended Findings and Award. The decision affirms the Board's continuing jurisdiction to enforce awards beyond the five-year limitation for altering them and stresses the necessity of a complete evidentiary record regarding compliance before a decision can be rendered.

Petition for ReconsiderationPremature dismissalLabor Code section 5909Transmission of caseElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Report and RecommendationProof of serviceContinuing jurisdictionSection 5803Section 5804
References
7
Case No. ADJ6697300
Regular
Aug 31, 2015

Lorenzo Yanez vs. Universal Label Printers, Sparta Insurance Company, Employers Compensation Insurance Company

This case involves an insurance dispute over contribution liability for a workers' compensation claim. The applicant, Lorenzo Yanez, sustained an injury while employed by Universal Label Printers, with coverage from Sparta Insurance Company and Employers Compensation Insurance Company. A Compromise and Release (C&R) agreement was approved, which included an addendum purportedly allocating liability between Sparta (17%) and Employers (87%). Sparta sought to enforce this addendum for reimbursement, but the trial judge denied their petition, finding a lack of jurisdiction due to no separate petition for contribution being filed within the statutory one-year period. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding continuing jurisdiction to enforce the C&R and its addendum under Labor Code section 5803, and returned the matter to the trial judge to determine the enforceability and terms of the addendum.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition for ContributionLabor Code Section 5500.5Continuing JurisdictionLabor Code Section 5803Apportionment of Liability
References
10
Case No. ADJ10364681
Regular
Jul 18, 2016

GREGORIO ROMERO vs. LA MARRIOTT HOTEL, MARRIOTT CLAIMS SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was untimely. California law strictly enforces the jurisdictional deadline for filing petitions for reconsideration, and proof of mailing is insufficient; the petition must be received by the WCAB within the prescribed 25-day period. The WCAB found that the petition was filed well beyond this deadline, rendering it void and without legal effect.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWCAB Rule 10507WCAB Rule 10508WCAB Rule 10845WCAB Rule 10392Service by MailProof of FilingAdministrative Law Judge
References
4
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. ADJ8151763
Regular
Dec 31, 2013

ADINA BONILLA vs. ATHERTON BAPTIST HOMES, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal regarding an order for sanctions against a lien claimant for failing to pay a lien activation fee. However, the Board granted reconsideration of the sanctions order, rescinding it due to a federal court injunction temporarily enjoining enforcement of the fee provisions. The matter was returned to the WCJ for further proceedings pending final federal court determination on the fee's enforceability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay SanctionsLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Labor Code section 5813Angelotti Chiropractic v. Bakerpreliminary injunctionfederal court
References
1
Case No. ADJ8141174
Regular
Dec 03, 2013

JAIME FLORES vs. HARBOR CHOICE EXPRESS LTD CORP., GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Removal filed by a lien claimant's representative, deeming the sanctions order appealable through reconsideration. The WCAB granted reconsideration of an order imposing sanctions for failure to pay a lien activation fee, citing confusion surrounding the fee's enforceability. In light of a federal court's preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the lien activation fee provisions, the WCAB rescinded the sanctions order. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Labor Code section 4903.06Lien activation feePetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Pay SanctionsWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPreliminary injunctionAngelotti Chiropractic v. BakerRescinded
References
1
Case No. ADJ3107792 (AHM 0148954)
Regular
Apr 09, 2012

EDGAR QUIJADA vs. ORE-CAL CORPORATION, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) as untimely. The original order was issued on October 18, 2011, but the petition was not filed until November 22, 2011, 35 days later. California law strictly enforces a 25-day deadline for filing such petitions, with this time limit being jurisdictional. The WCAB also noted that even if they had wanted to grant reconsideration on their own motion, the 60-day window had expired before the petition reached their attention. Therefore, the WCAB had no choice but to dismiss the petition due to its tardiness.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitsLien ClaimantAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationService by MailLabor Code
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 14,640 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