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. ADJ6793843
Regular
Jan 24, 2012

CHRIS WHITE vs. B & B MOTORS, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration, dismissing the lien claimant's petition. The Board found reconsideration was improvidently granted as the lien claimant sought to reconsider a nonexistent order of dismissal. Reconsideration is only permissible for final orders, and the WCJ's comments did not constitute a final order. The lien claimant will be able to seek reconsideration after a final dismissal order is issued.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalIndustrial injuryCalendaring errorCalifornia Code of Procedure section 473Notice of Intention to Dismiss LienFinal orderDecision After ReconsiderationOpinion and Order Granting Petition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ3505181 (POM 0262203)
Regular
Mar 26, 2019

DANIEL HERRERA vs. ROBERT HARMAN & ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES, MCKELVEY, BELLWOOD LAUNDRY & LINEN, CROTHALL LAUNDRY SERVICE; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded an order dismissing the applicant's case for lack of prosecution. The dismissal occurred because the applicant's objection to the dismissal petition was allegedly not properly filed with the EAMS system, despite being mailed to the District Office. The WCAB found sufficient evidence in the applicant's petition and supporting documents to warrant a hearing on the merits of the dismissal. The case is returned to the trial level for the judge to set a hearing and consider the dismissal petition.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseLack of ProsecutionEAMSPetition for Dismissal for Lack of Diligent ProsecutionNotice of Intention to DismissObjection to DismissalRescindedReturned to Trial Level
References
Case No. ADJ 1153404
Regular
Sep 04, 2008

Barbara Clark vs. SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM

Applicant's petition for reconsideration is dismissed as untimely. Reconsideration is granted for Dr. Tepper's petition, with his deposition fee set at $250/hour, allowing him to contest the fee afterward under Labor Code section 5307.6(c).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationDismissing ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code section 5903(b)FraudDiscovery Orders
References
Case No. LAO 0843620
Regular
May 23, 2008

Michelle Bloess-Mitchell vs. Brown Bunyan Moon & More, Inc., Zenith Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify an order dismissing an applicant's claim for lack of prosecution. The Board affirmed the dismissal of the applicant's claim but amended the order to explicitly state that jurisdiction is retained over all unresolved lien claims. This amendment aims to prevent confusion and ensure lien claimants, like Dr. Silver, can still litigate their claims.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantReconsiderationDismissal for lack of prosecutionDue processNotice of Intention to DismissOrder of DismissalWCJIndustrial injuryApplicant's claim
References
Case No. ADJ6708769
Regular
Sep 20, 2012

MARTHA GARCIA vs. ROYAL CABINETS, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE CO.

This case involves a lien claimant, SAI Professional Services, seeking reconsideration of a WCJ's order dismissing its lien. The lien claimant argued it had filed an objection to the Notice of Intention to Dismiss, asserting they never received notice of the lien trial. The Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the dismissal order, and returned the matter to the WCJ. This was due to the WCJ appearing unaware of the lien claimant's timely filed objection, preventing the WCJ from considering its merits. The Board also advised the lien claimant that future unverified petitions would be dismissed.

Lien claimantReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienNotice of Intention to DismissWCJPetition for ReconsiderationObjectionGood CauseVerificationRescind
References
Case No. ADJ884160 (LBO 0394637)
Regular
Mar 08, 2013

Shahdeh Khodawandi vs. Disneyland Resort

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order dismissing lien claimant Dr. Thomas's lien claim. The dismissal occurred after Dr. Thomas and his then-agent failed to appear at a lien conference and a subsequent Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOI) was not properly served on his agent. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration timely as the dismissal order was not properly served on Dr. Thomas's agent of record. Furthermore, the dismissal order was issued prematurely, before the full 35-day period for a response to the NOI had expired, even with the mail-delay extension. The case is returned to the trial level to determine if Dr. Thomas has good cause to set aside the NOI.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ConferenceCompromise and ReleaseNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienGood CauseService of ProcessAgent of Record
References
Case No. ADJ1340949 (MON 0357520)
Regular
Sep 16, 2013

MARCO ROSALES vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES

Here is a summary of the case for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order dismissing lien claimant Jerry A. Jacobson's attorney fee lien. The dismissal was based on Mr. Jacobson's failure to appear at a mandatory settlement conference, but the Board found the WCJ improperly designated applicant's counsel to serve a self-executing dismissal order. Furthermore, there was no proof of service of the dismissal order or confirmation that a timely objection was not received. The Board rescinded the dismissal order and returned the case to the trial level for proper notice and further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantDismissal of LienReconsiderationWCJ ErrorAttorney FeesDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedEAMSAppeals Board Rule 10770.1(h)Notice of Intention to Dismiss
References
Case No. ADJ7942666; ADJ7942662
Regular
Feb 18, 2014

ELMER FERNANDEZ vs. DUNCAN BOLT COMPANY, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT, INC.

This case concerns a lien claimant, Post-Surgical Rehab Specialists, seeking reconsideration of a dismissal order for failing to appear at a lien trial. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the dismissal in ADJ7942666 due to multiple missed appearances. However, the dismissal was amended to strike ADJ7942662 because that claim was not included in a prior notice of intention to dismiss. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning, finding the claimant's asserted neglect excusable for ADJ7942662 but not for ADJ7942666.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder for DismissalFailure to AppearLien TrialLien ConferenceNotice of Intention to DismissExcusable NeglectMiscalendared
References
Case No. ADJ4139709
Regular
Jan 14, 2010

JORGE HERRERA vs. ROMANO'S MACARONI GRILL, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Applicant filed a petition for reconsideration from a non-final Notice of Intention to Dismiss, which is procedurally improper. Simultaneously, a different judge approved a Compromise and Release Agreement on the same day the petition was filed, an action beyond the judge's authority once the petition was pending. The Board dismissed the Applicant's petition for reconsideration and, on its own motion, granted reconsideration of the approved Compromise and Release. Consequently, the Order Approving Compromise and Release was vacated and the matter remanded for further consideration of the agreement.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalMandatory Settlement ConferenceCompromise and Release AgreementNotice of Intention to DismissWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJEAMSLabor CodeFinal Order
References
Showing 1-10 of 15,417 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