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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. SAU10030321
Regular
Oct 08, 2019

BRIAN DUARTE vs. ALL ABOUT PAINT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Brian Duarte's petition for reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order, decision, or award. A final order must determine a substantive right or liability, or a fundamental threshold issue, not interlocutory procedural or evidentiary matters. The WCJ's order consolidating cases, designating a master file, staying liens, and noticing a hearing was deemed an interlocutory procedural order and therefore not subject to reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionOrder of ConsolidationDesignation of Master File
References
Case No. ADJ9388991; ADJ9388992
Regular
Nov 04, 2025

RUTILIO PORTILLO GUARDADO vs. JBC282 AUTO, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

Applicant Rutilio Portillo Guardado sought reconsideration of the Findings and Orders issued on August 19, 2025, which declared him a vexatious litigant and imposed a pre-filing order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) Report and Recommendation, detailing the applicant's history of repeatedly filing unsubstantiated claims and demands for a large settlement check despite his case being settled in 2022. The WCAB found the applicant's petition for reconsideration to be without merit and, for the reasons stated in the WCJ's report, denied the petition, affirming the vexatious litigant finding and the pre-filing order.

Vexatious litigantPre-Filing OrderPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersReport and RecommendationLabor Code Section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemWCAB Rule 10430Compromise and ReleaseUninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund
References
Case No. ADJ1052618
Regular
May 24, 2012

HAYDEE MUNOZ vs. PAYLESS SHOESOURCE, GALLAGHER BASSETT

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration and Removal filed by the applicant, Haydee Munoz. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was not filed from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The petition, in this instance, sought reconsideration of a pre-trial order regarding evidence, which is considered a non-final interlocutory order. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the request for removal were denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrdersSubstantive RightLiabilityRemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code SectionsNon-FinalProcedural Decisions
References
Case No. ADJ4330106 (LBO 0374013)
Regular
Feb 06, 2014

VICTORIA WILLIAMS vs. RANCHO SANTIAGO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Victoria Williams. The WCAB determined that the petition was not properly before it because it sought reconsideration of an interlocutory procedural order, not a final order that determines substantive rights. Such pre-trial orders are not subject to reconsideration under Labor Code section 5900. Even if the petition had addressed a final order, it would have been denied on the merits based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial OrderEvidenceDiscoveryVenue
References
Case No. ADJ6939085
Regular
May 09, 2014

APACELY HERNANDEZ vs. ALLAN AIRCRAFT SUPPLY COMPANY, MARKEL SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed petitions for reconsideration filed by Allan Aircraft Supply Company and Markel Services. The WCAB held that reconsideration can only be granted for final orders, not interlocutory procedural orders. Pre-trial orders concerning evidence, discovery, trial setting, or venue do not determine substantive rights and are therefore not subject to reconsideration. This dismissal aligns with established precedent defining final orders as those that determine substantive rights or liabilities.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetitions for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrdersSubstantive RightsLiabilityPre-trial OrdersDiscoveryVenue
References
Case No. ADJ800698 (SRO 0128141)
Regular
Apr 25, 2012

Kevin Elliott vs. Fire Protection Unlimited, Specialty Risk

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order compelling service of medical reports was not a final order. However, construing the petition as a request for removal, the Board granted it, finding a potential untimeliness issue with the lien claimant's lien under Labor Code section 4903.5. The Board rescinded the original order and returned the case to the trial level for a lien conference to determine the existence, filing date, and validity of the lien.

Labor Code section 4903.5Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder to Compel Service of Medical Reportslien claimantRS MedicalOrder Approving Compromise and Releaseuntimely filed lienlaches defenselien conference
References
Case No. ADJ16042609, ADJ13305672, ADJ13956136, ADJ10174349, ADJ10876442
Regular
Oct 21, 2025

JESSE STONE ORDONAZ vs. BURGER KING STEVENSON RESTAURANTS, WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA, CALIFORNIA FOOD MANAGEMENT, LLC, MITSUI SUMITOMO

The applicant, Jesse Stone Ordonaz, a declared vexatious litigant, filed a petition for removal after the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCJ) rejected their applications for adjudication. The rejection was based on the applicant's failure to comply with a pre-filing order requiring permission to file new applications. The applicant alleged fraud in a prior Compromise and Release and sought to relitigate claims. The Appeals Board denied the petition for removal, affirming the WCJ's decision because the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm and did not abide by the vexatious litigant order.

Vexatious litigantPre-filing orderPetition for removalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Rejecting Applications for AdjudicationCompromise and ReleaseFraudRelitigationWCJSubstantial prejudice
References
Case No. ADJ9274305
Regular
Dec 15, 2014

SALVADOR REYES vs. AVP&H A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Salvador Reyes's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory order, not a final decision. The Petition for Removal was dismissed as moot, as the underlying issue regarding a specific Qualified Medical Examiner appeared to be resolved. Both petitions were denied as they did not address substantive rights or liabilities. The order reflects standard practice for non-final and moot petitions.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityMootnessQMEOrder to CompelMeet and Confer
References
Case No. ADJ8081723
Regular
Apr 29, 2014

BEATRIZ DELGADO vs. INDUSPAC CALIFORNIA, INC./WESTERN FOAM PACKING PRODUCTS, PINNACLE

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Applicant Beatriz Delgado. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition. The WCAB reasoned that reconsideration can only be sought for final orders that determine substantive rights or liabilities, not for interlocutory procedural orders. Pre-trial orders regarding evidence, discovery, trial setting, or venue are considered interlocutory and therefore not subject to reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityPre-trial OrdersEvidenceDiscoverySetting for Trial
References
Showing 1-10 of 10,552 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