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. ADJ18189986
Regular
Aug 15, 2025

ESMERALDA SANCHEZ vs. KELLERMEYER BERGENSONS SERVICES, LLC; CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICES; ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Esmeralda Sanchez claimed industrial injury to multiple body parts while employed as a janitor for Kellermeyer Bergensons Services, LLC. The WCJ initially found the lien claimant, Spectrum Medical Group, failed to prove injury AOE/COE, awarding only $1,000 for a specific service date and excluding Dr. Nia's medical-legal report due to non-compliance with Labor Code § 4628. Both the defendant (Kellermeyer Bergensons Services, LLC, Constitution State Services, Zurich American Insurance Company) and the lien claimant petitioned for reconsideration, citing errors in the WCJ's findings regarding admissible evidence and the need for further record development. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted both petitions, deferring a final decision to allow for further review of the merits and the entire record in light of applicable statutory and decisional law.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantAOE/COELabor Code § 4628Medical Legal ReportSubstantial EvidenceAdmissibilityIndustrial InjurySpectrum Medical Group
References
21
Case No. ADJ9943316 ADJ9558081
Regular
Dec 01, 2017

WING QUAN vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES

This case involves competing petitions for reconsideration from lien claimants Joyce Altman Interpreting and Orthomed. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Orthomed's petition, upholding the finding that they failed to meet their burden of proof for reimbursement. However, the WCAB granted Joyce Altman's petition, remanding the issue of sanctions and costs against the defendant for delaying payment of interpreting services. The WCAB affirmed the original finding that Joyce Altman failed to establish the market rate for her services.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersMedical Provider NetworkOrthomedJoyce Altman InterpretingFrivolous ActionsSanctionsCosts
References
4
Case No. ADJ4392577 (LBO 0392493)
Regular
Jul 18, 2011

JOSE HERNANDEZ vs. UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICES, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PA

This case addresses a lien claim for interpreter services. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration and denied the lien claimant's petition. The WCAB found that the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof by not establishing that the applicant actually required interpreter services. Therefore, the lien for interpreting services was denied in its entirety.

Medical Provider NetworkMPNLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardCompromise and ReleaseInterpreter ServicesBurden of ProofDue ProcessLabor Code
References
2
Case No. ADJ3040480
Regular
Feb 19, 2009

ERIC BROWN vs. JOHNSON CONTROLS WORLD SERVICES, INC, AIMS, SACRAMENTO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed defendant Johnson Controls World Services, Inc.'s petition for removal. The petition sought to reverse an order taking the case off calendar, but it was filed forty days after service, exceeding the twenty-day limit. Furthermore, the petition lacked the required verification and proof of service. Even if considered on its merits, the WCAB would have denied the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalOff CalendarAdministrative Law JudgeReopeningTimelinessWCAB Rule 10843(a)WCAB Rule 10843(b)WCAB Rule 10850Proof of Service
References
0
Case No. LBO 0297361
Regular
Nov 28, 2007

ANTHONY TENNISON vs. NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES, CIGA by its servicing representative, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, for Reliance Insurance, in liquidation

The Appeals Board dismissed petitions for reconsideration and removal challenging an order compelling the applicant's wife to attend a continued deposition. The pro se petition was dismissed as untimely and unverified, while the attorney's petition was dismissed because discovery orders are not final and thus not subject to reconsideration. The Board affirmed the WCJ's order, finding the wife waived her marital privilege by appearing and testifying, and cautioned parties about potential sanctions for their behavior.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removaldepositionmarital privilegechild care reimbursementdiscovery orderinterlocutory orderfinal orderuntimely petition
References
12
Case No. ADJ2219973 (LAO 0762909)
Regular
Sep 02, 2016

MARIA LOPEZ vs. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - IHSS, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Maria Lopez's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. California law generally allows 25 days for filing a petition for reconsideration after service by mail, with extensions for weekends or holidays. Crucially, a petition must be *received* by the WCAB within this deadline, not just mailed. The petition in this case was filed on September 2, 2016, over 25 days after the WCJ's August 5, 2016 decision. As the Appeals Board has no jurisdiction over untimely petitions, it was dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationTimelinessDismissalJurisdictionalService by MailExtension of TimeWCJ DecisionLabor CodeCalifornia Code of Regulations
References
4
Case No. ADJ8158024
Regular
Nov 10, 2015

JOSE ESCOBAR vs. CARDINAL HEALTH; SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration and removal filed by Cardinal Health and Sedgwick Claims Management Services. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the underlying decision was an interlocutory procedural or evidentiary ruling, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. Furthermore, the petition for removal was denied as no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm was demonstrated, nor was it shown that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. The Board adopted the WCJ's report for its reasoning in dismissing and denying the petitions.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory OrderProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionExtraordinary Remedy
References
6
Case No. ADJ8216409
Regular
Jan 20, 2015

NORMA FLORES vs. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES/IHSS, YORK RISK SERVICES

In *Flores v. Department of Social Services/IHSS*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed an applicant's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on November 26, 2014, more than twenty-five days after the WCJ's decision was served on October 20, 2014. The WCAB emphasized that the filing deadline for a petition for reconsideration is jurisdictional. Therefore, the Board lacked the authority to grant the petition, regardless of its merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Jurisdictional Time LimitWCJ Report and RecommendationDismissalService of DecisionMailing ExtensionCode of Civil Procedure Section 1013
References
6
Case No. ADJ3591939 (LAO 07459514)
Regular
Jan 09, 2009

JUANA VENEGAS vs. X-CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE, in liquidation, by BROADSPIRE, MERLE NORMAN COSMETICS, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, INC.

AIG Claims Services, Inc. (AIG) appeals the WCJ's October 20, 2008 determination that the issue of applicant's alleged special employment by Merle Norman Cosmetics must be submitted to arbitration. The Appeals Board dismisses the petition for reconsideration, grants the petition for removal, and rescinds the submission to arbitration.

Special employmentCIGAcovered claimsarbitrationremovalreconsiderationinterim orderfinal orderprejudiceLabor Code section 5275(a)
References
11
Case No. ADJ736716 (ANA 0400973) ADJ3010829 (ANA 0400924) ADJ7503662 ADJ8980493
Regular
Nov 08, 2013

JAIME RAMIREZ vs. HIGH GRADE FORM, BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, ZURICH, CHARTIS

This case involved a Petition for Reconsideration challenging a lien dismissal. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition, adopting the WCJ's report. The lien was dismissed because the $100 lien activation fee required by Labor Code section 4903.06(a) was not paid, making the necessity of the services irrelevant. While the dismissal applied to services pre-dating July 31, 2012, the Board noted potential future claims for services rendered on May 6, 2013, would require a $150 filing fee and could be pursued as a petition for costs.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien dismissalLabor Code section 4903.06(a)Lien activation feeInterpreting servicesWCAB hearingINJAB RefundablePetition for costsCalifornia Lien Services
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 17,623 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