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. ADJ19167634
Regular
Nov 07, 2025

JOSIE VERGARA vs. COMPASS GROUP, AIU INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal filed by the applicant, Josie Vergara. The petition challenged a Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) determination that a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel was invalid due to inaccuracies in the panel request, specifically an incorrect claim number and primary treating physician. The Board affirmed that strict compliance with AD Rule 30, which requires accurate information in QME panel requests, is essential for due process and proper claim identification, citing prior decisions. The Board found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm warranting removal.

Petition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderThreshold IssueStipulationFindings of FactQualified Medical EvaluatorQME Panel RequestAdministrative Rule 30Due Process
References
Case No. ADJ20165742
Regular
Jul 18, 2025

DEBRA SILVEIRA vs. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INCORPORATED

Applicant Debra Silveira sought reconsideration of an April 29, 2025 Findings of Fact and Order, which deemed a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel valid despite being requested by defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Incorporated, with an incorrect claim number. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the prior decision, and substituted new findings. The Board ruled that strict compliance with Administrative Director Rule 30 regarding complete and correct claim numbers for QME panel requests is required to ensure due process and prevent conflicting or overlapping panels. Consequently, the defendant's panel (7773036) was deemed invalid, and the applicant's panel (7775940) was declared valid.

QME panel validityincorrect claim numberAD Rule 30due processadministrative law judgePetition for Reconsiderationremoval standardDWC Medical Unitprocedural defectinadvertent error
References
Case No. ADJ3205834 (RDG 0117741)
Regular
Mar 05, 2012

RAFAEL MOJICA vs. JOE SILVEIRA, dba SILVEIRA & SONS, CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE, Administered By AMERICAN ALL-RISK LOSS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a final order. Even if it were considered a final order, the WCAB would have denied it based on the Workers' Compensation Judge's report. Additionally, the petition, treated as a Petition for Removal, was denied as it failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. Consequently, the WCAB ordered the dismissal of the Petition for Reconsideration and the denial of the Petition for Removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalFinal OrderLabor Code section 4062.3(g)CostsAttorney's FeesPetition for RemovalSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Showing 1-3 of 3 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