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. 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. ADJ6690599
Regular
Jul 05, 2013

MARIA MORENO vs. KELLY SERVICES, INC.; Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered By ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Defendant Kelly Services' petition for reconsideration, reversing the trial judge's decision to admit certain lien claimant exhibits and award payment. The Board found that lien claimant Foundation Medical Group (FMG) failed to comply with Labor Code section 4903.8(d) by not submitting required declarations for its billing records. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings regarding FMG's lien. Additionally, the Board dismissed lien claimant Express Case Management's petition for reconsideration as untimely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4903.8(d)Declaration under penalty of perjuryIndustrial injuryLow back injuryCompromise and ReleaseLien trialMedical bills
References
0
Case No. ADJ7787891
Regular
Sep 25, 2015

JORGE CERVANTES vs. JBM SPORT TRUCK AND ACCESSORIES, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

Here's a summary for a lawyer, in a maximum of four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing a prior decision that disallowed a lien claimant's invoice for photocopying services. The Board found that the lien claimant, California Imaging Solutions, acted as an agent or independent contractor for applicant's attorney, a member of the State Bar. This status exempted them from Business and Professions Code registration and bonding requirements. Consequently, the case was returned to the trial level to determine the reasonable fee for the lien claimant's services.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationIndependent ContractorBusiness and Professions Code Section 22451Registration RequirementBonding RequirementProfessional PhotocopierState Bar MemberApplicant's Attorney
References
10
Case No. ADJ8759866
Regular
Sep 01, 2016

ERNESTINA ESCAMILLA vs. PELICAN PRODUCTS, INC., UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case addresses a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a denied lien. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, affirming the administrative law judge's finding that the lien was barred by Labor Code section 4903.5(a)'s 18-month limitations period. The Board ruled that because services were provided after July 1, 2013, the lien claimant was obligated to file within 18 months of the last service date, which they failed to do. The Board reasoned that the statute provided reasonable time for filing after its enactment.

Labor Code section 4903.5(a)lien claimantreconsideration18-month limitation periodJuly 12013reasonable timeretroactive applicationproceduralvocational rehabilitation
References
10
Case No. ADJ7259313, ADJ7259058
Regular
May 13, 2013

JOSE GARATE vs. LEADING EDGE AVIATION SERVICES, FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CHUBB SERVICES CORPORATION

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in a maximum of four sentences: This case involves lien claimants who petitioned for reconsideration after their liens were dismissed for failure to pay the required activation fee as mandated by Labor Code section 4903.06. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the judge's report which found the petition improper due to multiple claimants filing as one and violation of service rules. The judge's report emphasized that the lien activation fee was not paid by the lien claimants, necessitating dismissal with prejudice per statutory language. Therefore, the Board concluded the lien claimants' arguments regarding jurisdiction and service were without merit and upheld the dismissal orders.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsActivation FeeDismissal of LiensLabor Code Section 4903.06Due ProcessJurisdictionService of OrdersFinal Orders
References
1
Case No. ADJ8093832
Regular
Sep 24, 2015

ARACELI CASILLAS DE VAZQUEZ vs. EL TAPATIO MARKET, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

Lien claimants Western Imaging Services and Tower Copy Service petitioned for reconsideration after their liens were denied by the WCJ. The WCJ had ruled they were unregistered professional photocopiers and not exempt from registration requirements. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the lien claimants were indeed independent contractors of applicant's attorney, a member of the State Bar. Therefore, they qualified for the exemption under Business and Professions Code section 22451(b). The case was remanded for a determination of the reasonableness of the claimed fees.

Professional photocopierBusiness and Professions Code Section 22450Business and Professions Code Section 22451Independent contractor exemptionMember of the State BarLien claimantsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for reconsiderationDecision after reconsiderationWCJ
References
0
Case No. LAO 0837305, LAO 0837306
Regular
Apr 29, 2008

IRMA ALEJANDRA VILLAMAN vs. CALIFORNIA CLEANING SERVICE, CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY c/o AMERICAN ALL RISK LOSS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition to reconsider the allowance of Dr. Kan's lien for medical treatment related to the applicant's industrial injuries. However, the Board granted the lien claimant's petition to clarify the award. Upon reconsideration, the Board amended the original award to disallow reimbursement for "work conditioning" services, reducing Dr. Kan's lien from $7,998.35 to $7,858.35.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryCompensableCompromise and ReleaseMedical TreatmentChiropractic VisitsWork Conditioning
References
1
Case No. ADJ2303350 (FRE 0230817)
Regular
Apr 05, 2013

Benjamin Martinez vs. Boghossian Raisin Packing, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of notices to dismiss their liens, but the Appeals Board dismissed their petition as interlocutory orders are not subject to reconsideration. The Board granted removal on its own motion and intends to sanction the lien claimants' representative, AMR Group, and the lien claimants themselves (Hooty Services and Accutox) for frivolous and bad-faith actions. This intent to sanction stems from their attempt to challenge a procedural order clearly permitted by Appeals Board rules.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsNotice of IntentionDismissalRemovalSanctionsLabor CodeFinal OrderInterlocutory Decisions
References
7
Case No. ADJ8300983
Regular
Apr 28, 2014

ALBERTO CHICO vs. ONEMOR, INC., dba McDONALD'S, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORP.

The Appeals Board denied reconsideration for the Jacobs-represented lien claimants, upholding the disallowance of their liens due to a failure to prove industrial injury and insufficient evidence. However, the Board granted reconsideration for the Kauffman-represented lien claimants, rescinding the sanctions previously imposed. While agreeing that the Kauffman claimants also failed to prove injury, the Board found their conduct did not rise to the level of bad faith or frivolous tactics required for sanctions.

WCABlien claimantspetition for reconsiderationFindings and OrderOrder Overruling Objection and Imposing Sanctionsindustrial injuryprobative evidencesanctionsbad-faith actionsfrivolous
References
9
Case No. LAO 0827070
Regular
Oct 29, 2007

MARGARITO SANCHEZ vs. VOLT SERVICES GROUP; ITT HARTFORD c/o SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petitions for reconsideration of four lien claimants because they were filed untimely, more than six months after the judge's January 31, 2007 order. However, the petition of Charles Erickson, CST, was deemed timely due to defective service of the original order. The Board ultimately denied Erickson's petition, adopting the WCJ's reasoning in their report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsFindings and OrderTimelinessService of ProcessOfficial Address RecordPresumption of Official DutyJurisdictional Time LimitAgreed Medical Evaluator
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 13,122 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