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. 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. ADJ7793819 ADJ8527743 ADJ7742174
Regular
Jun 06, 2013

EVERETT JOHNSON vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION, CORVEL

The Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration as moot because the order sought to be reconsidered was rescinded pending a decision on the applicant's petition to set aside the Compromise and Release. The defendant's Petition for Removal was also denied as they were not currently aggrieved. The matter is returned to the WCJ to hear and rule on the applicant's Petition to Set Aside Order Approving Compromise and Release. The defendant may seek reconsideration after a final order on the settlement is issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalCompromise and Releaseattorney feesWCJset aside ordermisrepresentationfraudcumulative trauma
References
0
Case No. BGN 89889
Regular
Dec 21, 2007

JAMES D. WILLIAMS vs. BARKER MANAGEMENT, ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant's Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed because it sought to reconsider a non-final procedural order and was not properly served on the defendants. The Appeals Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The case is returned to the trial level for a decision on the defendant's petition to declare the applicant a vexatious litigant.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalStipulated AwardCompromise and ReleaseOff CalendarVexatious LitigantFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderFraudLabor Code Section 5900
References
6
Case No. ADJ11525401
Regular
Feb 11, 2019

JOAQUIN CABALLERO vs. HACIENDA FARM SERVICES, INC., RISICO CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it sought review of an interlocutory order regarding a replacement Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) panel. Such orders are not considered "final" decisions that can be reconsidered under Labor Code sections 5900(a), 5902, and 5903. Furthermore, the WCAB denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, an extraordinary remedy, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy later. Therefore, the WCAB found no grounds to grant either petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removalfinal ordersubstantive rightliabilitythreshold issueinterlocutoryprocedural decisionevidentiary decision
References
6
Case No. ADJ9758397, ADJ9758401
Regular
Dec 09, 2016

JAVIER MARIN vs. INTERSTATE HOTELS, dba HILTON IRVINE, STAR INDEMNITY COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a defendant's attempt to remove or reconsider a finding that the medical evidence was insufficient to establish industrial causation for the applicant's injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the order to develop the record was not a final determination of substantive rights. The petition for removal was denied because a finding of industrial causation requires identification of at least one body part, which was not yet established. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning in its decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalJoint Findings and Ordersubstantial medical evidenceindustrial causationdevelop the recordfinal ordersubstantive rightliability
References
4
Case No. ADJ1635548 (POM 0300369)
Regular
Feb 20, 2015

FERNANDO GUTIERREZ vs. CLAIM JUMPER RESTAURANT, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order they sought to reconsider was not a final order, as it merely provided an opportunity to litigate a lien claim. The WCAB also denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCJ correctly vacated a prior order dismissing a lien claimant's claim due to a lack of proof of service. Therefore, the matter will proceed to further litigation regarding the lien.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Vacating Lien DismissalOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantCompromise and ReleaseNotice of Intent to DismissProof of ServiceSubstantive Right
References
2
Case No. ADJ7969059
Regular
Jan 07, 2013

JOSE RODRIGUEZ vs. CITY PARK, AMTRUST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, finding no final order existed to be reconsidered. The WCAB treated the petition as a request for removal and denied it, as the applicant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm from the administrative law judge's findings regarding the Qualified Medical Evaluator selection. The underlying issue concerned the validity of the PQME selection process. The WCAB affirmed the findings on PQME selection but stressed that reconsideration is only available for final orders.

WCABQME PanelPQMEReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderLabor CodeCal. Code of Regs.Administrative Law JudgeSubstantive Rights
References
5
Case No. ADJ6621190
Regular
Jul 11, 2011

DEANNA CARROLL vs. WINCO HOLDINGS, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petitions for reconsideration of two interlocutory orders: one denying a venue change and another compelling a further deposition. The WCAB found that neither order constituted a final decision that could be reconsidered under Labor Code Section 5900. Applicant's procedural arguments regarding bias and lack of good cause were therefore not addressed on their merits at this stage. The WCAB also denied the petitions for removal, adopting the WCJ's reasoning, and warned the applicant about improper document submission.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJVenue OrderDeposition OrderFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderLabor Code Section 5900WCAB Rule 10842
References
3
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. ADJ10075857
Regular
Mar 26, 2019

VICTORINO POSADAS (DECEASED) vs. A & N SERVICE STATION INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order rescinding a prior dismissal of the applicant's claim. The Board found the rescission order was not a final decision and thus not subject to reconsideration. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the rescission order, and returned the matter to the trial level. This action was taken due to a lack of proceedings record, preventing review of the basis for rescinding the initial dismissal. The WCJ will now reconsider the petition to reopen, venue change, and potential consolidation with a death claim.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Rescinding Order of Case DismissalDismissal without prejudicePetition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilitySubstitution of AttorneysDeath ClaimLack of Prosecution
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 14,246 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