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. LAO 0806287
Regular
Dec 13, 2007

AURORA BARAJAS vs. THE MAINLAND COMPANY, INC. aka CRAZY SHIRTS, INC., ALLIANZ INSURANCE COMPANY, INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA Administered By ACE USA/ESIS, CENTRE INSURANCE COMPANY Administered By REM, SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION Administered By COMPLINK

The Appeals Board granted Shidu Chiropractic's petition for reconsideration and amended the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) decision. While Shidu was properly notified of the lien trial, the WCJ erred by issuing a Notice of Intention to Disallow Lien Claim instead of a Notice of Intention to Dismiss, and by dismissing the lien with prejudice. The lien is now dismissed without prejudice, acknowledging potential procedural errors by the WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantReconsiderationDismissal with PrejudiceNotice of Intention to DisallowNotice of Intention to DismissCompromise and ReleaseLien TrialGood CauseWithout Prejudice
References
Case No. ADJ1327924
Regular
Jun 24, 2013

FRUCTUOSO CONTRERAS vs. RAYMOND INTERIOR SYSTEMS NORTH, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order taking a lien off calendar was not a final order. However, the Board granted removal, finding significant prejudice to the defendant. This was due to the lien claimant's failure to pay the required lien activation fee for a pre-2013 lien. Consequently, the Board ordered the lien dismissed with prejudice for this statutory violation.

Lien activation feePetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissal with prejudiceLabor Code section 4903.06Declaration of Readiness to ProceedLien conferenceInterlocutory orderFinal order
References
Case No. ADJ10183569
Regular
Dec 26, 2017

LEAMON PERKINS vs. DON L, KNOX, DLK CAPITAL INC., AMERICAN MODERN INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision dismisses a petition for reconsideration and denies a petition for removal. The Board found the WCJ's order denying a petition to vacate without prejudice was not a "final" order, thus precluding reconsideration. Furthermore, the Board denied removal, as the insurer failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from an order that preserves their right to address coverage issues at trial. The insurer can raise coverage disputes at the subsequent trial because the WCJ's prior order was not final.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueWithout PrejudiceSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ123100 (RIV 0072847) ADJ2366145 (RIV 0072898) ADJ1800144 (RIV 0072908)
Regular
Oct 30, 2008

JESUS VILLABA, (JESUS VILLALBA) vs. MARK LOGAN LANDSCAPE, APPLIED RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal because they failed to demonstrate the required prejudice or irreparable harm. While the defendant sought to resolve three workers' compensation claims via stipulations, the Board returned the matter to the trial level. This allows the judge to consider additional facts and arguments presented by the defendant regarding the unresolved third claim.

Petition for RemovalStipulations with Request for AwardWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportPrejudiceIrreparable HarmLabor Code Section 5310Trial LevelHearingDiscretionary Power
References
Case No. ADJ7457608
Regular
Oct 18, 2011

CLARENCE MILES vs. KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a petition to disqualify a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) due to alleged bias against the applicant's attorney. The applicant's attorney claimed the WCJ demonstrated enmity after a September 1, 2011 incident, which would prejudice his clients. The WCJ submitted a report stating that the incident would not affect his impartiality and that all decisions are based on evidence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, finding no reason to doubt the WCJ's assurance of fairness.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJ BiasAdministrative Law JudgeEnmityPrejudiceMandatory Settlement ConferenceReport and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardEvidenceDay in Court
References
Case No. ADJ1280594 (LBO 0368661)
Regular
Jan 28, 2014

LULA GOLDEN LACEY vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted a Petition for Removal concerning an Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) prejudicial notes in a lien claim. The WCJ's notes questioned the legal justification for a lien claimant's excessive medical fee charges and suggested sanctions. The WCAB struck these notes, finding they created an "appearance of prejudice" that could improperly influence the trial judge. The case was returned to the trial level for a decision based on the merits, free from these comments.

Petition for RemovalConference NotesPrejudiceDue ProcessChilling EffectWCAB Rule 10561Report and RecommendationAppearance of PrejudiceDisqualificationTrial Judge
References
Case No. SAL 0113718
Regular
Mar 21, 2008

MANUEL DeLANDA vs. SODEXHO, AIGRM

The applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation claim dismissed with prejudice due to repeated failures to appear at hearings and a medical evaluation. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the dismissal to be without prejudice. This decision acknowledges the applicant's lack of participation but prioritizes the public policy of disposing of cases on their merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationDismissal with PrejudiceDismissal without PrejudiceApplication for Adjudication of ClaimLaborerLeft Hand InjuryLeft Wrist InjuryLeft Upper Extremity InjurySequela
References
Case No. ADJ7337820
Regular
Apr 07, 2014

JOHN BOOTY vs. NEW YORK GIANTS, PMA GROUP, Arizona Cardinals, Fairmont Premier Insurance/Zenith Insurance Company

The applicant, a professional football player, claimed cumulative industrial injury against multiple NFL teams, including the New York Giants and the Arizona Cardinals. The applicant requested to dismiss the Arizona Cardinals with prejudice. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the dismissal to be "without prejudice." This preserves the New York Giants' potential right to seek contribution from the Cardinals should they be found liable for benefits. The Board affirmed the applicant's right to choose which defendants to litigate against.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Party DefendantsCumulative InjuryProfessional Football PlayerNational Football LeagueJurisdictionLiabilityDate of InjuryCompromise & Release Agreement
References
Case No. ADJ9134227
Regular
Dec 18, 2015

VICTOR DIAZ vs. EXXEL OUTDOORS, INC.; THE HARTFORD

The applicant sought reconsideration of a dismissal order, arguing the judge failed to issue a proper notice of intent to dismiss. The Board denied the petition, finding the judge correctly amended an initial dismissal order to correct an error specifying dismissal "with prejudice" instead of "without prejudice" as initially noticed. This amendment was authorized by WCAB Rule 10859 and Labor Code 5803 to rectify a mistake and conform the order to the notice, which the applicant had not objected to. Therefore, no due process violation occurred, and the applicant received the relief sought.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Order Dismissing CaseNotice of Intention to DismissDismissal without prejudiceDismissal with prejudiceWCJWCAB Rule 10582WCAB Rule 10780WCAB Rule 10859
References
Case No. ADJ11323347
Regular
Apr 15, 2019

PARVIZ AREFIAN vs. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., OLD REPUBLIC as administered by BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Uber's petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's order denying their petition to dismiss was not a final order. The WCAB also denied Uber's petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board held that due process requires a hearing on the merits of the dismissal petition, not premature appellate review. Therefore, the dismissal petition must be litigated at the trial level.

Res JudicataPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionThreshold IssueSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmDue ProcessFair Hearing
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,226 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