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. ADJ962699 (STK 0204013)
Regular
Jun 08, 2009

RUTILIO MIRAMONTES vs. MONIER LIFETILE, AIG, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involved Rutilio Miramontes' workers' compensation claim against Monier Lifetile, which was denied based on a post-termination defense under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10). The applicant's injury occurred before termination, and the defendants argued that the claim was invalid as it was filed after notice of termination. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, affirming the Workers' Compensation Judge's finding. The WCAB agreed that the applicant's medical records, which contained evidence of his condition prior to termination, satisfied an exception to the post-termination defense, thus allowing the claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRUTILIO MIRAMONTESMONIER LIFETILEAIGGALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICESINC.ADJ962699STK 0204013ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATIONWORKERS' COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
References
Case No. ADJ7093933
Regular
Sep 19, 2011

GLORIA MIRAMONTES vs. LINDA DABBS, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendant. The Board is granting reconsideration because it needs further time to study the factual and legal issues presented by the record. This action is deemed necessary to ensure a complete understanding and a just decision. All future communications should be directed to the Board's Office of the Commissioners.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issuesJust and reasoned decisionDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersADJ7093933Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGloria Miramontes
References
Case No. ADJ9625293, ADJ9625295, ADJ9545692
Regular
Feb 22, 2016

JUAN MIRAMONTES vs. NATURE'S TREE SERVICE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant was an employee of Nature's Tree Service. This decision was based on the judge's credibility determination, which the Board gave great weight. The judge found ample evidence of employment, including direction from David Salas, wearing a company uniform, and using company vehicles. The Board concluded there was no substantial evidence to overturn the judge's findings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONWCJCREDIBILITY DETERMINATIONGARZANATURE'S TREE SERVICESTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDJUAN MIRAMONTESEMPLOYEEINDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
References
Case No. ADJ9549789, ADJ10928268
Regular
May 05, 2025

IVAN MIRAMONTES vs. LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Applicant Ivan Miramontes sought reconsideration of a Joint Findings and Award from January 27, 2025, which found industrial injury to his psyche and specific body parts with assigned permanent disabilities. Applicant raised contentions including defective service, mischaracterization of his primary orthopedic doctor, alleged attorney failure, and reliance on unsubstantial medical evidence, particularly regarding Dr. Faddoul's report. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to admit specified exhibits into evidence to correct a clerical error by the WCJ. The Board otherwise affirmed the WCJ's findings, concluding that the petition was timely filed and the applicant's other contentions lacked merit.

Petition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPsycheHipsChestNeckWristShouldersPermanent Disability
References
Case No. ADJ14991797
Regular
Sep 26, 2025

RUTILIO AQUINO vs. TABRIZI INC.; BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Rutilio Aquino filed a petition for removal from an order issued on August 5, 2025, by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ), which took the matter off calendar. The applicant contended that the case should proceed to trial. Defendants filed an Answer, and the WCJ subsequently filed a Report and Recommendation advising the denial of removal. The Appeals Board, after considering the petition and the WCJ's report, decided to deny the petition, stating that removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner were to be issued.

Petition for RemovalOrder Taking Matter Off CalendarWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdmitted EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceTrial
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. ADJ2777203
Regular
Feb 03, 2012

ISMAEL MIRAMONTES vs. LIONS RAISINS, ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed a judge's decision, amending it to defer the disposition of $10,100.00. This amount represents the difference between a vacated $60,000 attorney's fee and the awarded $49,900 fee, which the applicant's attorney improperly converted before the fee was final. The Board's primary concern is ensuring the injured worker ultimately receives this $10,100.00. Jurisdiction is reserved for further proceedings and resolution by the WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAttorney Fee MishandlingTrust AccountOverpaid Attorney FeeDisposition DeferredJurisdiction ReservedReconsideration GrantedDecision After ReconsiderationCommutationSupplemental Finding of Fact
References
Showing 1-7 of 7 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