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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ603568 (MON 0359075)
Regular
Feb 22, 2013

COLEE PITCHFORD vs. TRIMAC TRANSPORTATION, CHARTIS

In Pitchford v. Trimac Transportation, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was primarily based on the petition's failure to comply with Labor Code section 5905, which mandates service on all adverse parties. The WCAB also noted that even if properly served, the petition would have been denied on its merits, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. Finally, the Board clarified that MJR Management Services, Inc. is not a party but an alleged representative, and their representation of a lien claimant lacked proper documentation in the EAMS.

Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5905Adverse partiesService deficiencyWorkers' compensation administrative law judgeReport and RecommendationElectronic Adjudication Management SystemEAMSLien claimantMJR Management Services
References
Case No. ADJ8791607
Regular
Apr 24, 2017

MARIA TRUJILLO vs. NYLOK LLC, ACE AMERICAN INS. CO., CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Nylok LLC's petition for reconsideration in *Trujillo v. Nylok LLC*. This dismissal was based on the failure to properly serve the petition on the adverse party, applicant Maria Trujillo or her attorney. Labor Code section 5905 mandates such service, and its absence is grounds for dismissal under California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 10850. Had the merits been considered, the WCAB indicated it would have denied the petition based on established precedent regarding the date of ongoing treatment services.

Petition for ReconsiderationProof of ServiceAdverse PartiesDismissalLabor Code Section 5905Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 §10850Lien ClaimantOngoing TreatmentDate of ServicesAppeals Board Panel Decision
References
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. ADJ9334766, ADJ319279 (MON 0358792), ADJ3055294 (MON 0361854)
Regular
Jul 17, 2015

TROY WHITETO vs. LONG BEACH TRANSIT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Troy Whiteto's Petition for Reconsideration against Long Beach Transit. The dismissal was based on improper service, as the applicant failed to serve all adverse parties as required by Labor Code section 5905 and WCAB Rule 10510(b). Specifically, the applicant only served one of the defendant's attorneys and did not serve other relevant parties. Consequently, the WCAB found the petition procedurally deficient and ordered its dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalServiceAdverse PartiesAttorney of RecordWCJ ReportLabor Code section 5905WCAB Rule 10510(b)Represented PartyLong Beach Transit
References
Case No. VN0 0440027
Regular
Jan 15, 2008

GUADALUPE SANCHEZ ROJAS vs. MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERVICES, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES

This case involves a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision that significantly reduced their lien amount. The Board dismissed the petition primarily because it was not properly verified and lacked a required proof of service on all adverse parties. Additionally, the lien claimant's representative lacked standing to file the petition due to failure to formally appear or substitute as attorney.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJMedical treatmentLien trialMissing exhibitsVerification defectProof of serviceSubstitution of attorneys
References
Case No. ADJ9416789
Regular
May 10, 2019

ANTONIO CHAVEZ vs. DEL SOL FARM LABOR SERVICES, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Antonio Chavez's petition for reconsideration as untimely, having been filed on March 13, 2019, well past the January 28, 2019 deadline. Additionally, the petition lacked the required verification and proof of service on adverse parties. These multiple procedural defects, including the untimeliness, failure to verify, and lack of service, deprived the Board of jurisdiction to consider the petition's merits. Therefore, the petition was dismissed based on these grounds.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingUnverified PetitionProof of ServiceLabor Code Section 5900Labor Code Section 5902Labor Code Section 5903Labor Code Section 5905California Code of Regulations Title 8Jurisdiction
References
Case No. ADJ3107406 (LAO 0758074)
Regular
Jun 21, 2013

SHAN S. GU vs. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SOCIAL SERVICES, Permissibly Self-Insured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing its lien for failure to pay a required activation fee. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was filed untimely, outside the statutory 20-day window after service. Furthermore, even if timely, the petition would have been dismissed for failure to serve all adverse parties and file proof of service. The WCAB noted the lien activation fee was, in fact, paid prior to the dismissal, but this did not cure the procedural defects of the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalLien activation feeLabor Code section 4903.06WCJReport and RecommendationEAMSProof of Service
References
Case No. ADJ6984694, ADJ6984708, ADJ7010763
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

SONIA VARGAS vs. LA COCINA MEXICAN, FIRSTCOMP

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses a Petition for Reconsideration filed by a lien claimant. The primary reason for dismissal is the failure to provide proof of service on all adverse parties, as mandated by statute and board rules. The Board also noted that even if properly served, the petition would have been denied on its merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportProof of ServiceLabor Code Section 5905WCAB Rules 10505WCAB Rules 10850EAMSAdverse PartiesDismissal
References
Case No. ADJ3964372 (MON 0247784) ADJ4081926 (MON 0247785)
Regular
Dec 07, 2018

ROBERT BAKER vs. CITY OF COMPTON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant Robert Baker's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed *in pro per* without proof of service on all adverse parties, including his own attorney. The petition also failed to meet the requirements of Appeals Board Rule 10856 by not providing a specific offer of proof for newly discovered evidence or fraud. Consequently, the Board found the petition defective on multiple grounds.

Petition for Reconsiderationin pro perJoint Order Approving C&RWCJAppeals Board Rule 10856newly discovered evidenceoffer of proofcumulative evidenceproof of serviceadverse parties
References
Showing 1-10 of 6,649 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