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. 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
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Pender

This case involves a subrogation action initiated by an unnamed plaintiff (subrogee) to recover $15,200 in additional personal injury protection (APIP) benefits paid to its subrogor, Darci Plumbing Co., Inc., for an employee, Kareem Atkins. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint based on documentary evidence, collateral estoppel, and res judicata, arguing that a prior Workers’ Compensation Board decision from November 24, 2008, which awarded Atkins basic economic loss benefits, was determinative. The plaintiff cross-moved for sanctions. The court found that APIP benefits, defined by 11 NYCRR 65-1.3, are distinct from statutory basic economic loss benefits and that an insured's subrogation rights for APIP are equitable, existing under common law. Therefore, the workers' compensation award was not res judicata, and the plaintiff was not precluded from asserting its subrogation rights for amounts paid in addition to the statutory basic economic loss. Consequently, the defendants' motion to dismiss was denied, and the plaintiff's cross-motion for sanctions was also denied.

SubrogationAPIP BenefitsPersonal Injury ProtectionWorkers' CompensationCollateral EstoppelRes JudicataMotion to DismissSanctionsNo-Fault LawInsurance Law
References
1
Case No. ADJ3415468 (AHM 0146168)
Regular
Feb 05, 2013

ZOBEIDA ALVA vs. OXFORD VILLA, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal and imposed a $750 sanction on lien claimant SAI Professional Services and its representative, Betty Rezmer, for filing a frivolous Petition for Reconsideration. The Board found the petition contained willful misrepresentations of the record and disregarded evidence that contradicted the lien claimant's claims. After failing to respond to the Board's notice of intent to sanction, the $750 penalty is now officially assessed and must be paid to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Rule 10561Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFrivolous ActionWillful MisrepresentationsFailure to Appear
References
0
Case No. ADJ739750 (FRE 0217695), ADJ3422922 (FRE 0217696), ADJ4620151 (FRE 0217213)
Regular
Aug 26, 2010

JERRY WILLIAMS vs. GOLDEN STATE VINTNERS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded prior findings, returning the case to the trial level for further proceedings due to insufficient documentation regarding credit for benefits paid and resolution of EDD liens. The Board also issued a notice of intention to impose a $250 sanction on SCIF for failing to comply with the mandatory rule requiring a computer printout of benefits paid. This failure to provide essential information caused unnecessary delay and appeared to be a bad-faith tactic. The matter requires clarification of calculations and a clear record for review.

WCABGolden State VintnersState Compensation Insurance FundJerry Williamsmaintenance mechanicwinery workerforemancumulative traumabilateral kneeshearing loss
References
0
Case No. ADJ7678424
Regular
Dec 05, 2013

ROGELIO ORTIZ ROSALES vs. HYDRO SCAPE PRODUCTS, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICA CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal while granting it on its own motion. This action stemmed from the defendant's violation of Rules of Practice and Procedure by attaching 77 pages of previously admitted exhibits to their petition. Consequently, sanctions of $275 were imposed jointly and severally on the defendant's insurer, their legal firm, and the attorney for bad faith actions and tactics that caused unnecessary burden. The sanctions were subsequently paid by the defendant's legal firm.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalWCJDiscoveryAbuse of DiscretionSanctionsLabor Code section 5813Rules of Practice and ProcedureBad Faith ActionsFrivolous Tactics
References
0
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
0
Case No. ADJ6620175
Regular
Oct 10, 2013

CAMELLA MORA GONZALEZ vs. KAY'S CLEANERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board is imposing sanctions under Labor Code § 5813 against Innovative Medical Management and lien claimant Priority Care Medical Transportation for $1,000.00, jointly and severally. Additionally, sanctions of $250.00 are imposed against Louis Heard, the lien claimant's hearing representative. These sanctions were ordered due to a failure to object to a previously issued notice of intention, following the Board's affirmation of the dismissal of the lien claim. The sanctioned parties did not provide any written objection demonstrating good cause to avoid the sanctions.

Labor Code § 5813SanctionsPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimDismissalPriority Care Medical TransportationInnovative Medical ManagementLouis HeardWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardHearing Representative
References
0
Case No. ADJ962796 (ANA 0403408)
Regular
Aug 26, 2015

JAMES RODNEY RICHARD vs. HOUSTON ASTROS

Attorneys for both the applicant and defendant were sanctioned $50.00 each for failing to follow the Board's explicit instructions. The attorneys improperly filed a stipulation for appellate attorney's fees with a district office instead of the Office of Commissioners. This oversight led to an inaccurate award and necessitated further Board action. While acknowledging the attorneys' apologies and assurances of future compliance, the Board imposed the minimal sanction due to the clear disregard of its directives.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsAppellate Attorney's FeesStipulationNotice of IntentionDistrict OfficeOffice of CommissionersLabor Code Section 5813WCAB Rule 10561Amended Award
References
0
Case No. ADJ593283 (AHM 0117827) ADJ1747148 (AHM 0117828) ADJ196184 (AHM 0117826)
Regular
Aug 01, 2011

DEBORAH ARRIOLA-LARA vs. NORDSTROMS; Permissibly Self-Insured

The Appeals Board denied Nordstrom's Petition for Removal seeking to overturn an order allowing applicant's supplemental deposition at her attorney's office. The Board found the petition lacked merit. However, the Board sua sponte granted removal on the limited issue of sanctions against Nordstrom's counsel. This action stems from counsel's inclusion of numerous extraneous and previously filed documents in their 114-page petition, constituting a violation of procedural rules and potentially a frivolous tactic warranting sanctions.

Petition for RemovalSupplemental DepositionDue Process ViolationCode of Civil Procedure Section 2025.250Good CauseWCAB Rule 10842(c)Labor Code Section 5813Bad-Faith ActionsFrivolous TacticsUnnecessary Delay
References
4
Case No. ADJ2303350 (FRE 0230817)
Regular
Jun 17, 2013

BENJAMIN MARTINEZ vs. BOGHOSIAN RAISIN PACKING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision, the Board is issuing its final order after granting removal. The Board will sanction Tim Roupoli, AMR Group, Hooty Services, and Accutox, jointly and severally, $500 for failing to object to a prior notice of intention to sanction. These parties are ordered to pay the sanction within 20 days to the General Fund. The underlying reasons for the sanction are incorporated by reference from the prior notice.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionLien ClaimantTim RoupoliAMR GroupHooty ServicesAccutoxLab. Code § 5813Cal. Code Regs. § 10561
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 2,104 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