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. ADJ7233959 ADJ7233792
Regular
Mar 28, 2011

SALVADOR LANDIN vs. STAFFMARK INVESTMENT, CHARTIS SAN DIEGO

This case involves an attorney's petition for reconsideration after an administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered them to pay defendant costs and a $\$500$ sanction. The applicant's attorney argued they did not have adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard regarding the sanctions. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's orders, and returned the matter for further proceedings because the orders were issued without proper notice and opportunity to present a defense, violating due process. The Board emphasized that sanctions require proper procedure, including a notice of intent and a hearing.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSALVADOR LANDINSTAFFMARK INVESTMENTCHARTIS SAN DIEGOPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONWCJSANCTIONCOSTSLABOR CODE §5813DUE PROCESS
References
0
Case No. ADJ8905657
Regular
Nov 27, 2013

SALVADOR SANCHEZ vs. ANTONIO RAMOS CONCRETE, AMTRUST

This case involved an applicant, Salvador Sanchez, and defendants Antonio Ramos Concrete and Amtrust. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final order, specifically an Order Denying Change of Venue, which does not determine substantive rights. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant's attorney was admonished for filing a petition challenging a non-final order.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory ProceduralEvidentiary DecisionsRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmInadequate Remedy
References
6
Case No. ADJ9038979
Regular
Jun 14, 2018

SALVADOR BUENO vs. TRUGREEN LANDCARE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Salvador Bueno's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed significantly late. California law provides 25 days to file a petition for reconsideration after a decision is served by mail, with limited extensions. The petition was filed on May 3, 2018, over nine months after the WCJ's August 3, 2017 decision. Untimely petitions are jurisdictional defects, meaning the WCAB lacks the authority to consider them.

Petition for ReconsiderationTimelinessDismissalWCJ decisionMail serviceBusiness day extensionFiling deadlineJurisdictionalAppeals BoardWCAB
References
4
Case No. ADJ7654039
Regular
Nov 10, 2015

SALVADOR TOVAR vs. SCHERFIELD RANCHES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Salvador Tovar's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The petition was submitted more than 25 days after the Workers' Compensation Judge's decision was served, exceeding the jurisdictional deadline. Even if the petition had been timely, it would have been denied due to its insufficient content. Therefore, the WCAB lacked authority to consider the substance of the petition and ordered its dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingWCABWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJ DecisionLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictional LimitAppeals Board AuthoritySkeletal Petition
References
4
Case No. ADJ563691
Regular
Dec 16, 2018

SALVADOR CAZAREZ vs. THE LAKES COUNTRY CLUB, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision disallowing a portion of a lien claimant's bill. The Board found that the lien claimant waived the issue of utilization review by failing to raise it at trial. The Board also declined to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions, despite the WCJ's recommendation. The case involved industrial injuries to Salvador Cazarez, which were settled via Compromise and Release.

Petition for ReconsiderationUtilization ReviewLabor Code §4610WaiverAdmissibility of EvidenceAgreed Medical ExaminerLien ClaimantCompromise and ReleaseReasonably Required ServicesSubstantial Medical Evidence
References
2
Case No. ADJ7022015
Regular
Jan 28, 2013

SALVADOR SANCHEZ vs. BENTLEY PRINCE STREET, THE HARTFORD, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

This order dismisses applicant Salvador Sanchez's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order determining substantive rights, but rather from interlocutory procedural decisions. The Board further denies the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Applicant's procedural requests were deemed non-final and therefore not subject to reconsideration or removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionNon-FinalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
8
Case No. ADJ9274305
Regular
Dec 15, 2014

SALVADOR REYES vs. AVP&H A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Salvador Reyes's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory order, not a final decision. The Petition for Removal was dismissed as moot, as the underlying issue regarding a specific Qualified Medical Examiner appeared to be resolved. Both petitions were denied as they did not address substantive rights or liabilities. The order reflects standard practice for non-final and moot petitions.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityMootnessQMEOrder to CompelMeet and Confer
References
9
Case No. ADJ2623172
Regular
Sep 01, 2016

SALVADOR SANCHEZ vs. LA BREA AUTO BODY, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves lien claimant Elena Konstant seeking payment for medical treatment and reporting related to applicant Salvador Sanchez's alleged industrial psychiatric injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Konstant's petition for reconsideration after the initial denial of her claim. Subsequently, a Commissioner's Conference was held where Konstant and the defendant reached a full settlement of all disputes. Therefore, Konstant's petition for reconsideration has been rendered moot and is dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetitionLien ClaimantFindings and OrderPsychiatric InjuryCommissioner's ConferenceStipulation and OrderMootDismissed
References
0
Case No. ADJ2001631
Regular
Dec 05, 2011

SALVADOR AGUAYO, JR. vs. AMERICAN GOLD CORPORATION, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a workers' compensation applicant, Salvador Aguayo, Jr., and defendant American Gold Corporation. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision that awarded applicant's counsel $770 for attorney's fees related to discovery necessitated by the defendant's prohibited ex parte communications with medical evaluators. While affirming the fee award, the Board noted that applicant's counsel had previously received an extraordinary 20% fee in a Compromise and Release agreement, which exceeded guideline recommendations. The denial of reconsideration means the $770 award for discovery fees stands, despite the defendant's arguments against it.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSalvador AguayoAmerican Gold CorporationArch Insurance CompanyPetition for ReconsiderationWCJAttorney's FeesProhibited Ex Parte CommunicationsCompromise and ReleasePolicy and Procedural Manual
References
1
Case No. ADJ6436224
Regular
Dec 13, 2016

SALVADOR BAIRES vs. NUMERO UNO MARKET, INC., PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Salvador Baires's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final order that only addressed an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue. The WCAB also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Furthermore, reconsideration was deemed an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the applicant is eventually issued. Finally, the applicant's attorney was reminded to include their state bar number on future filings.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary RemedySubstantial Prejudice
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 59 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