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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 05, 1980

In re the Claim of Ross v. Standard Milling Co.

This case concerns an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision, filed on February 5, 1980, which approved a $50 attorney’s fee as a lien upon an award made to the claimant. The claimant had sustained a back injury in March 1978 and received compensation payments from the carrier. After retaining an attorney, a hearing in May 1979 established accident, notice, and causal relationship, formalizing the award already paid by the carrier. The carrier contested the attorney's fee as a lien, arguing the claimant had already received the full award. The Board affirmed the lien, citing relevant case law and Section 24 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The court ultimately affirmed the Board's decision, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board.

Workers' CompensationAttorney's FeesLienAwardAffirmed DecisionStatutory InterpretationNew York LawBoard DecisionInsurance CarrierLegal Services
References
3
Case No. ADJ2278453
Regular
Dec 24, 2008

SANDRA LARSEN vs. SANCTUARY DAY SPA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of her $45\%$ permanent disability rating, finding sufficient medical evidence for apportionment. However, the Board granted the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration regarding attorney fees, rescinding the prior order to allow further proceedings to determine a reasonable fee split among three attorneys. The matter was returned to the trial level for a lien conference to equitably divide attorney fees for services rendered to the applicant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical ExaminerLien ClaimantAttorney's FeesPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award OrderRescind
References
2
Case No. ADJ8788327
Regular
Jan 11, 2016

VIVIAN BRAMBILA vs. MAYFIELD JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, OAK RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision that disallowed a lien claim by Western Imaging Services, Inc. (WIS) for photocopying services. The prior decision found WIS was not an independent contractor under Business and Professions Code Section 22451. However, the Board reversed this, applying its en banc decision in *Cornejo v. Younique Café, Inc.*. This new precedent establishes that copy service fees for medical-legal expenses are exempt from registration and bonding requirements if the claimant acts as an agent or independent contractor of a State Bar member. WIS presented evidence establishing such a relationship with applicant's attorney, making the registration requirements inapplicable. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on WIS's lien.

Western Imaging ServicesBusiness and Professions Code Section 22451independent contractoragentState Barphotocopyinglien claimantmedical-legal expensesLabor Code section 4620(a)registration and bonding requirements
References
4
Case No. ADJ717785 (MON 0357270) ADJ2210479 (MON0357271) ADJ4156131 (MON 0357272) ADJ2088727 (MON 0357273)
Regular
Oct 12, 2010

GABRIELA MEDINA vs. INNOVATIVE FACILITY SERVICES, GALLAGHER BASSETTELK GROVE

This case involves a lien claimant, Arthur Malkin, D.C., seeking "re-reconsideration" of a prior denial of his lien claim. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was improperly brought, untimely filed, and constituted a successive petition on the same issues. The Board also directed the Workers' Compensation Judge to address the defendants' pending petition for costs, sanctions, and attorney's fees against the lien claimant.

Lien claimantPetition for reconsiderationDismissalNewly discovered evidenceLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)Post-termination filingWCJEAMS errorPetition for costssanctions
References
9
Case No. ADJ8928907
Regular
Oct 29, 2015

NOEL CARMONA vs. SUN VALLEY PRODUCTS, INC., INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration for lien claimant Western Imaging Services, Inc. (WIS). WIS had its lien claim disallowed because it failed to prove registration as a professional photocopier. The Board found that WIS was exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code § 22451(b) as it acted as an agent or independent contractor for applicant's attorney, a member of the State Bar. Consequently, the prior decision was rescinded, and the case was returned for further proceedings on the lien amount.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNoel CarmonaSun Valley Products Inc.Insurance Company of the WestWestern Imaging Services Inc.lien claimantpetition for reconsiderationadministrative law judgeBusiness and Professions Code section 22450Business and Professions Code section 22451(b)
References
3
Case No. ADJ7787891
Regular
Sep 25, 2015

JORGE CERVANTES vs. JBM SPORT TRUCK AND ACCESSORIES, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

Here's a summary for a lawyer, in a maximum of four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing a prior decision that disallowed a lien claimant's invoice for photocopying services. The Board found that the lien claimant, California Imaging Solutions, acted as an agent or independent contractor for applicant's attorney, a member of the State Bar. This status exempted them from Business and Professions Code registration and bonding requirements. Consequently, the case was returned to the trial level to determine the reasonable fee for the lien claimant's services.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationIndependent ContractorBusiness and Professions Code Section 22451Registration RequirementBonding RequirementProfessional PhotocopierState Bar MemberApplicant's Attorney
References
10
Case No. ADJ9289375
Regular
Jan 11, 2016

ESTEBAN MIRANDA vs. HEARTLAND PRECISION, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to lien claimant California Imaging Solutions, Inc. (CIS). The prior decision disallowed CIS's lien based on its failure to register as a professional copier and meet its burden of proof for an exemption. The Board reversed, holding that CIS made an unrebutted prima facie showing that it acted as an agent or independent contractor for attorneys, thus exempting it from registration requirements under Business and Professions Code section 22451(b), consistent with the en banc decision in *Cornejo*. The case was remanded for a new decision on the lien.

WCABLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationBusiness and Professions Code Section 22451Independent ContractorState Bar MemberPhotocopier ServicesLicensing ExemptionCornejo v. Younique Café
References
1
Case No. ADJ1035201
Regular
Oct 04, 2016

VICTOR DURAN vs. DONUT INN, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board is considering rescinding an order that dismissed Metro Med Shockwave's lien claim for failure to pay a $\$100$ lien activation fee. The WCJ dismissed the lien because the fee was not paid before the lien conference, citing prior precedent. However, the lien claimant argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay the fee based on a DWC Newsline article referencing a court order. The Board intends to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days, allowing further proceedings on the lien claim.

Labor Code section 4903.06Lien activation feeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMetro Med ShockwaveFigueroa v. B.C Doering Co.Angelotti Chiropractic v. BakerPreliminary injunctionDWC NewslineReconsiderationRescind order
References
2
Case No. ADJ7282108
Regular
Aug 29, 2014

PRUDENCIO MARTINEZ vs. TETRA TECH, INC.

This case involves a prior attorney seeking reconsideration of a $\$110,000$ workers' compensation settlement. The attorney claims the WCJ erred by not awarding him reasonable fees, arguing a subsequent stipulation dismissed his lien. However, the Appeals Board found the stipulation did not dismiss the attorney's lien. Instead, it directed payment of fees to another firm, which agreed to indemnify the defendant against the petitioner's lien. The Board denied reconsideration, advising the petitioner to pursue a lien conference if settlement negotiations fail.

Petition for ReconsiderationAttorney's FeesCompromise and ReleaseLienStipulationWCJAppeals BoardLabor CodeHold HarmlessIndemnify
References
3
Case No. ADJ6551234; ADJ6553660; ADJ6551315; ADJ6551627; ADJ7427373
Regular
Sep 26, 2011

ALBERTO VASQUEZ vs. BARRY AVENUE PLATING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order approving a compromise and release agreement because the prior attorney's lien for services was not addressed. The Board rescinded the $\$ 13,500.00$ attorney's fee award to the applicant's current attorney. The matter is returned to the trial level to schedule a hearing to determine a reasonable allocation of attorney's fees between the prior and current attorneys. The Board affirmed all other aspects of the original compromise and release.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseAttorney's FeesLien ClaimantWCJAdministrative Law JudgeAllocationReasonable ValueLegal Services
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 11,686 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