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. ADJ10715642
Regular
Oct 21, 2025

MISAEL RENTERIA vs. JUAN CARLOS RIVERA VAZQUEZ, DOG HOLDINGS, et al.

Defendant Shimin Xu filed multiple petitions for removal and disqualification, alleging bias against the WCJ and challenging a June 18, 2025 notice of hearing. The Appeals Board considered the allegations and the WCJ's Report and Recommendation, which advised against disqualification and removal. The Board found that the defendant failed to provide a substantive affidavit for disqualification and did not demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm for removal. Consequently, the Board denied the petition for removal and dismissed the petition for disqualification, also admonishing the defendant regarding vexatious litigant proceedings.

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWCJbiasLabor Code section 5311Code of Civil Procedure section 641affidavitdeclarationsubstantial prejudice
References
13
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
6
Case No. ADJ9194220 (MF) ADJ9194223
Regular
Feb 11, 2016

ALBERT BERNAL vs. ALLFAST FASTENING SYSTEMS, INC.

This case concerns an applicant's petition for removal from an order setting two workers' compensation cases for trial. The applicant argued the trial was improperly set due to timely objections, ongoing treatment, and defective readiness declarations, asserting prejudice. The WCJ's report recommended granting removal, acknowledging a need to review medical reports before setting trial. The Appeals Board granted removal, cancelled the trial, and ordered a new mandatory settlement conference to allow the judge to consider all evidence and arguments before deciding on a trial date.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedPermanent and StationaryPsychiatric InjuryOrthopedic InjuriesPrimary Treating PhysicianWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeTrial Exhibits
References
0
Case No. ADJ6915515
Regular
Jan 05, 2010

FRANCISCO GOMEZ vs. MERCADO FOOD ENTERPRISE, INC.; dba VALLATA SUPERMARKET # 16, SEDGWICK CMS, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because the venue change order was not a final, appealable decision. The Board also denied the applicant's petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable injury. The applicant had sought to set aside an order changing the venue of his case to the Bakersfield District Office. The Board incorporated the Presiding Judge's report recommending denial of the removal petition.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder changing venueBakersfield District OfficeLos Angeles District OfficePresiding Workers' Compensation JudgeFinal OrderSubstantive rights and liabilitiesSubstantial prejudiceIrreparable injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ8875197
Regular
Mar 03, 2017

ALAYNE ANNE BRAND vs. MOUNT DIABLO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's petition for removal filed on December 21, 2016, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The applicant's subsequent petition for removal, filed on January 4, 2017, seeking disqualification of the WCJ, was dismissed upon the applicant's attorney's withdrawal of that petition. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning in its decisions. The applicant also failed to comply with statutory requirements for removal requests.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ disqualificationsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationextraordinary remedyLabor Code section 5311Appeals Board Rule 10452notice of withdrawal
References
2
Case No. ADJ2841961 (SJO 0191311)
Regular
May 03, 2012

DERRICK LITTLE vs. WALKER CONCRETE CO., LIBERTY MUTUAL INS. CO.

Applicant Derrick Little filed an "appeal" of an order denying his motion to change venue, which the Board treated as a Petition for Removal. The Petition was dismissed because it failed to articulate any specific factual or legal contentions justifying the removal. Furthermore, the Petition did not demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, which are required for a grant of removal. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and recommendations in its entirety when dismissing the petition.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueWCJ OrderOrder Denying MotionDismissed PetitionSkeletal PetitionSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable InjuryWCAB Rule 10842WCAB Rule 10846
References
0
Case No. ADJ2195267
Regular
Sep 20, 2013

LYNN ASHER vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order determining substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted. The WCAB adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's Report and Recommendation for denying removal. The specific reasoning on the lien amount in the WCJ's report was excluded from adoption.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionWCJ ReportSubstantial Prejudice
References
8
Case No. ADJ2574910 (ANA 0328189)
Regular
Apr 12, 2017

MARIO MANRIQUEZ, JR. vs. JAMES LINEBACK M.D., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, and BREDFELDT, CORSON & ODUKOYA; ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because the order at issue was not a final determination of substantive rights. However, the Board granted the applicant's petition for removal and rescinded the WCJ's order denying a continuance of an expedited hearing. This decision was based on the WCJ's own report recommending rescission. The Board also declined to sanction the defendant or order reassignment at this time.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalExpedited HearingContinuanceOrder Denying RequestRescinded OrderFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiability
References
4
Case No. AD.J9467074, AD.J9468922
Regular
Oct 03, 2016

THEODORE DAVIS vs. CITY OF MODESTO, YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP, INC.

This case concerns the admissibility of a medical report by Dr. Besses and whether it can be reviewed by a panel qualified medical examiner (QME). The applicant sought reconsideration and removal of a prior decision that found the report inadmissible due to improper procedure under Labor Code section 4060. The Appeals Board treated the applicant's filing as a Petition for Reconsideration, finding that the admissibility of the report presented a critical issue in the case. Ultimately, the Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration and dismissed the Petition for Removal, upholding the prior decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalLabor Code section 4060Batten v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Qualified Medical Examiner (QME)Panel QMEAdmissibility of Medical ReportInterim OrdersFinal OrderThreshold Issues
References
7
Case No. ADJ1953116 (MON 0363119) ADJ361727 (MON 0363153)
Regular
Jul 07, 2011

OLEGARIO PEREZ vs. STREETS AHEAD, INC., BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Olegario Perez's petition for removal and dismissed his petition for reconsideration. The WCAB adopted the judge's report, which found no prejudice or irreparable harm to the applicant from a scheduled Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) appointment. The judge recommended denial of removal as the applicant had already been found temporarily disabled by an Agreed Medical Examiner (AME), and any disputes regarding the AME's status could be addressed through attendance at the ordered PQME exam.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Qualified Medical Examiner (QME)Declaration of Readiness to Proceed (DOR)Mandatory Settlement ConferenceMinute OrderEx parte communication
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 17,116 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