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. ADJ332528 (AHM 0104042)
Regular
Mar 22, 2011

ERNEST DANIELS vs. PIEDMONT ENGINEERS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board imposed a $250.00 sanction against the State Compensation Insurance Fund and its attorney, Maria Frias Callejas. This sanction was issued due to their failure to respond to a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions and their violation of the Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure. No timely objection demonstrating good cause was filed. Consequently, they are jointly and severally liable for the payment of the sanction to the Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsState Compensation Insurance FundMaria Frias CallejasRules of Practice and ProcedureNotice of IntentionGood CauseTimely ResponseJoint and Several LiabilityAttorney for Defendant
References
Case No. ADJ8423237
Regular
Nov 09, 2016

RUBEN SALINAS vs. MAGALY CORPORATION, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming that the lien claimant received due process despite the absence of a formal Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions. The Board found that the lien claimant had multiple opportunities to respond to the defendant's detailed petitions for sanctions and costs, including a hearing and subsequent amended filings. Therefore, the lien claimant had adequate notice and the opportunity to be heard, satisfying due process requirements.

WCABPetition for Reconsideration DeniedLien ClaimantDue ProcessNotice and Opportunity to be HeardPetition for SanctionsLabor Code § 5813WCJ Report AdoptedSanctions IssueAmended Petition for Sanctions
References
Case No. ADJ3942275 (LAO 0879499) ADJ4411298 (LAO 0879500)
Regular
Jul 12, 2012

JESUS RODRIGO GUZMAN vs. CHAMPION ARROWHEAD BRASS PRODUCTS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves sanctions imposed against Erika Campos and Fred F. Hafezi, M.D., for bad faith actions and tactics. They are jointly and severally sanctioned $1,000.00 payable to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. Sanctionable conduct included a misdated proof of service and misstatements of fact in a petition, as detailed in the WCJ's report. Neither Campos nor Hafezi responded to the Board's notice of intent to sanction.

SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Opinion and Decision After RemovalMisstatements of factBad faith actionsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJProof of servicePetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to Issue Sanctions
References
Case No. ADJ7149085
Regular
Sep 16, 2010

MARTINE MARTE vs. SENECA RESIDENTIAL & DAY TREATMENT CENTER, AIG INSURANCE CO., GALLAGHER-BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an administrative law judge's (WCJ) order imposing sanctions against the defendant. The defendant was sanctioned for failing to comply with a court order requiring specific responses regarding a Compromise and Release agreement. While the Board acknowledged the defendant's flawed attempt to withdraw the agreement and insufficient initial response, it found the defendant's actions did not rise to the level of bad faith or frivolous conduct warranting sanctions. Ultimately, the Board rescinded the sanctions order, finding the defendant had acted with the intent to remedy deficiencies in the settlement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseWCJPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsReport and RecommendationNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsFailure to Comply
References
Case No. ADJ9719826
Regular
Aug 12, 2016

ABIGAIL FLORES vs. RISSE CONSTRUCTION CO., AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a $\$1000$ sanction order for bad-faith actions. The sanction was imposed due to the defendant's egregious delay and frivolous objections in paying a $\$180$ interpreter's lien, which took over eight months and required multiple billings and a court order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, upholding the WCJ's finding of frivolous conduct intended to cause unnecessary delay. The Board also affirmed that due process was satisfied by providing the defendant notice and an opportunity to respond to the sanctions.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsOrder Imposing SanctionsBad Faith ActionsFrivolous ConductWCJLien ClaimUnnecessary DelayCertified Interpreter
References
Case No. ADJ1839916 (LBO 0396758)
Regular
Apr 19, 2016

JORGE LOPEZ vs. FASHION AVENUE INC., dba INTERNATIONAL GRAPHICS; FIRST COMP OMAHA, MARKEL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to Ramirez & Associates regarding sanctions imposed by an administrative law judge. While affirming the jurisdiction to sanction Ramirez & Associates, the Board reduced the awarded costs from $1,376.00 to $1,152.00 due to excessive attorney time billed for travel and appearance at a lien conference. The Board rescinded the original order and substituted it with a new one imposing $1,000.00 in sanctions and the reduced costs.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsGood CauseJurisdictionDue Process ViolationExcessive SanctionsAttorney FeesCosts
References
Case No. ADJ809010 (LAO 0877737)
Regular
Feb 28, 2012

Jessica Leaser vs. Washington Mutual, Zurich North America, SRS/SEDGWICK Claims Management Services

The Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed three days after the statutory deadline. Although the administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a notice of intent to sanction the lien claimant for proceeding to trial without a legal basis, the Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the sanctions, finding the WCJ's assessment of "no factual or legal basis" unsupported on the current record, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionJurisdictional Time LimitsRemoval on Board MotionMonetary SanctionsNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsRescinded SanctionsLien ClaimantClaims Administrator
References
Case No. ADJ7199989, ADJ7118722
Regular
Feb 13, 2012

JUAN CERVANTES vs. WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER, HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) sanctioned applicant's attorney, Sunil Shaw, for $\$250.00$. This sanction was imposed for violating Appeals Board Rule 10842, related to proceedings before the Board. The WCAB granted removal on its own motion and issued a notice of intention to sanction, to which no objection was received. The sanction amount has been paid.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionLabor Code Section 5310Appeals Board Rule 10842Notice of Intention to SanctionApplicant's AttorneyShow Good CauseDecision After RemovalWestern Medical Center
References
Case No. ADJ441378
Regular
Nov 16, 2011

MARY JANE RHODES vs. THE STANLEY WORKS FASTENING PERMISSIBLY SELF-INSURED AND ADJUSTED BY CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICES

The applicant, Mary Jane Rhodes, was previously sanctioned for repeatedly filing petitions raising the same issues, leading to a stay of sanctions conditioned on her refraining from further similar filings. Despite this, she filed another petition on April 15, 2011, causing the stay to be lifted and sanctions of $500.00 to be imposed. The Board now accepts a $50.00 payment towards these sanctions and grants a new stay, warning that further identical filings will result in the remaining sanctions being enforced and potential vexatious litigant status.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsLabor Code section 5813Appeals Board Rule 10561Petitions for reconsiderationStay of sanctionsVexatious litigantAppeals Board Rule 10782Findings and OrderCompromise and Release
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,395 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