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. ADJ4157066
Regular
Aug 13, 2023

PORFIRIO ABRAJAN vs. JOSE OCHOA FARM LABOR SERVICES, INC., VARIOUS EMPLOYERS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The WCAB dismissed SCIF's petition for removal because the June 6, 2013 order was not a final order. A prior order dated April 25, 2013, dismissing lien claims, was labeled "proposed" and remained ambiguous. The WCJ's subsequent rescission of that order was permissible as it was merely a notice of a future final order. As SCIF was not aggrieved by the rescission of a non-final order, their petition was dismissed.

Petition for RemovalOrder RescindingProposed FindingsLien ClaimsLien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06WCJ JurisdictionFinal OrderAggrieved PartyWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ2569351 (LAO 00867165)
Regular
May 14, 2012

ZENAIDA SONGCO vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's rescission order was not a final order. However, the Board granted the applicant's petition for removal and rescinded the WCJ's March 5, 2012 Rescission Order. This was because the defendant's petition for reconsideration, which prompted the rescission, was untimely filed. Consequently, the WCJ lacked jurisdiction to rescind the original Stipulated Award.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalRescission OrderAmended Stipulated AwardHazardous Material SpecialistNeck InjurySpine InjuryShoulder InjuryRight Hip InjuryPsyche Injury
References
9
Case No. ADJ8149506
Regular
Jul 19, 2017

MARTHA BELTRAN vs. KIMCO STAFFING/KIMSTAFF HR, SEDGWICK CMS

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: A Petition for Reconsideration was filed by a lien claimant on June 9, 2017, challenging Findings and Orders issued on May 15, 2017. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) issued an order rescinding those Findings and Orders on June 26, 2017. However, this rescission occurred 16 days after the petition, exceeding the 15-day limit under Rule 10859, rendering the rescission order void. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to affirm the WCJ's intent, validating the rescinded Findings and Orders.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder RescindingFindings and OrdersAdministrative Law JudgeLien ClaimantVoid OrderAffirm OrderKimco StaffingSedgwick CMS
References
0
Case No. ADJ7883922
Regular
Sep 14, 2012

MOISES HERNANDEZ LOPEZ vs. RAVA RANCHES, INC., CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL NETWORK SELFINSURED GROUP, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a dispute over a lien filed by a chiropractic provider for treatment rendered to an injured worker. The trial judge rescinded a submission order, finding a lack of substantial evidence for the lien. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, finding that the rescission order was premature. The Board rescinded the rescission order and returned the matter for a decision on the merits of the lien claim and any related MPN notice issues.

Petition for RemovalOrder Rescinding SubmissionLien ClaimantBurden of ProofSubstantial EvidenceReasonably Required TreatmentMedical Provider NetworkMPN NoticesCompromise and ReleaseWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ9843286
Regular
Oct 10, 2017

MARQUIS MAYFIELD vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, PSI, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

In *Mayfield v. Federal Express Corporation*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior order. The WCAB rescinded an August 2, 2017 order that had commuted future weekly payments to a lump sum of $6,000. This rescission was based on the defendant's petition for reconsideration, supported by the applicant's counsel, who also requested rescission. The primary reason for rescission was that the full settlement award had already been advanced to the applicant, leaving no remaining funds for commutation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCommutation OrderRescindedFederal Express CorporationSedgwick CMSPermanent Disability AwardEconomic HardshipStatement of Non-OppositionAdministrative Law Judge
References
0
Case No. ADJ10075857
Regular
Mar 26, 2019

VICTORINO POSADAS (DECEASED) vs. A & N SERVICE STATION INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order rescinding a prior dismissal of the applicant's claim. The Board found the rescission order was not a final decision and thus not subject to reconsideration. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the rescission order, and returned the matter to the trial level. This action was taken due to a lack of proceedings record, preventing review of the basis for rescinding the initial dismissal. The WCJ will now reconsider the petition to reopen, venue change, and potential consolidation with a death claim.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Rescinding Order of Case DismissalDismissal without prejudicePetition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilitySubstitution of AttorneysDeath ClaimLack of Prosecution
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bell Aircraft Corp. v. Siegler

The court affirmed both the final and intermediate orders without costs in this matter. The case primarily involved an appeal from an order that had found several defendants guilty of criminal contempt of court. Additionally, the appeal also addressed an order which denied a motion seeking to resettle an order of commitment. Furthermore, a motion to vacate and perpetually stay the orders of commitment was also denied. All presiding judges concurred with the decision.

Criminal ContemptOrder of CommitmentResettlement MotionVacate MotionStay OrdersAppellate ReviewOrder AffirmedJudicial Concurrence
References
1
Case No. ADJ3714425 (FRE 0234250) ADJ896033 (FRE 0171714)
Regular
Aug 22, 2014

MICHAEL WRIGHT vs. STAR MEDIA, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding a WCJ's order that enforced a reimbursement order against Travelers Indemnity Company. The Board found the reimbursement order void *ab initio* due to procedural due process infirmities. Specifically, the "self-destruct" clause in the order did not comport with due process protections outlined in precedent cases like *Mitchell v. Golden Eagle Ins.*, failing to guarantee a review of objections or automatically void the order upon valid objection. Therefore, Travelers' due process rights were violated, necessitating the rescission of the WCJ's findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder for ReimbursementCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)Cumulative Trauma InjuryAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)ApportionmentDue ProcessSelf-Destruct ClauseVoid Ab Initio
References
2
Case No. ADJ2858126 (LAO 0805680)
Regular
Aug 25, 2011

APOLONIA CORRALES vs. SILGAN PLASTICS CORP., GALLAGHER BASSETT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a Petition for Removal filed by lien claimant David Silver, M.D., challenging an order to continue a matter to lien trial for further record development. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition, finding Dr. Silver was not aggrieved by the June 8, 2011, order as it did not order record development. Furthermore, the Board found Dr. Silver failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm required for removal regarding the continuance. The petition was also dismissed as untimely and waived concerning a prior rescission order for which Dr. Silver had previously withdrawn a removal petition.

Petition for RemovalLien ClaimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ OrderFurther Development of RecordDue ProcessExigencyWCAB Rule 10843(a)Aggrieved PartyIrreparable Harm
References
0
Case No. ADJ2479344
Regular
Dec 20, 2013

FERNANDO ADAME vs. AMERON INTERNATIONAL

The defendant sought reconsideration of an approved compromise and release settlement, arguing the Order failed to address the applicant's serious and willful misconduct claim. This omission was contended to be a mutual mistake, warranting rescission of the Order. The WCJ recommended granting reconsideration based on evidence of an agreement to resolve the serious and willful claim and issue an amended order. Consequently, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the case to the trial level.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseRescissionSerious and Willful MisconductLabor Code section 4553Mutual MistakeReport and RecommendationTrial LevelDecision After ReconsiderationPermanent Disability Benefit Advances
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 24,066 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