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. ADJ7236324
Regular
Oct 23, 2015

MARIA VILCHIS vs. NORWALK MARRIOTT, ZURICH NORTH AMERICAN

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Maria Vilchis's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the applicant's failure to comply with WCAB Rule 10842(b), which mandates specific citations to the record to support evidentiary statements. The Board emphasized that the applicant cannot shift the burden of searching the record to the Appeals Board. This rule is consistent with appellate court procedures requiring proper record citation to avoid waiver of points.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCAB Rule 10842(b)Specific CitationsRecord ReferencesEvidentiary StatementsWaiverBurden of ProofAdministrative Law Judge ReportAppellate RulesDismissal Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ7313244
Regular
Sep 14, 2012

KEVIN WRIGHT vs. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board is issuing a notice of intention to sanction the defendant's attorneys $500 for misrepresenting the record and failing to follow procedural rules. The defendant's petition for reconsideration selectively quoted and omitted material facts from medical depositions, thereby distorting the evidence. Specifically, the defendant misrepresented a QME's opinion on industrial causation and applicant's stress levels. This failure to fairly state the evidence and provide specific record citations violates WCAB rules and warrants sanction.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 5813cumulative trauma injuryindustrial causationPetition for ReconsiderationPanel QMEWCJRules of Practice and Procedurematerial misrepresentationselective quotation
References
0
Case No. ADJ9919365, ADJ9919392, ADJ10564628
Regular
Aug 25, 2017

ALFREDO JORDAN RAMOS vs. BEN'S ROOFING, INC., REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's decision due to improperly identified exhibits and a lack of specific record citations in the opinion. The WCJ improperly admitted grouped medical reports and failed to cite which specific reports formed the basis of the Findings and Award. While the Appeals Board acknowledges the potential admissibility of the applicant's treating physician's later report, the WCJ retains discretion over its admission. The case is returned for further proceedings to allow for proper development of the record and a clearer articulation of the WCJ's reasoning.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardQualified Medical EvaluatorTreating Physician ReportLabor Code Section 5703Develop the RecordAdmissibility of EvidencePermanent DisabilityPanel QME
References
5
Case No. ADJ10102786
Regular
May 08, 2019

DANIELA BEAUDIN vs. LINDSAY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a prior decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The WCAB found the original decision lacked specific citations to the evidence in the record, making it impossible to assess the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) reasoning. The petitioner, Med-Legal Photocopy, failed to adequately support its claim for reimbursement of copying services with specific references to the evidence, violating WCAB rules. Therefore, the case needs to be reheard to ensure the ALJ's decision is properly supported by the record.

Med-Legal ExpenseLabor Code Section 4621WCAB Rule 10451Otis v. City of Los AngelesNon-IBR PetitionMedical RecordsSubpoenasInvoicesExplanation of ReviewsReasonable and Necessary
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 29, 1975

Brewery Workers Pension Fund v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund

In an action for a declaratory judgment and for specific performance of a certain agreement, defendants appeal from a judgment and order (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 29, 1975, which, *inter alia,* granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Judgment and order affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. There are no issues requiring a trial.

Declaratory JudgmentSpecific PerformanceSummary JudgmentAppealAffirmedQueens CountySupreme CourtContract LawJudgment and OrderAppellate Division
References
0
Case No. ADJ4609608 (SDO 0128566) ADJ359238 (SDO 0177353) ADJ2367088 (SDO 0203407) ADJ501165 (SDO 0230909) ADJ4697798 (SDO 0230913) ADJ4262068 (SDO 0230915) ADJ8302988
Regular
Oct 23, 2018

Matthew Lawrie vs. Lawrie and Company, Inc., Lawrie Racing, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The petition was dismissed because it did not seek reconsideration of a final order or award, which is a prerequisite for such a petition. Furthermore, the petition was found to be "skeletal," lacking specific details, evidence, or legal citations required by statute and regulation. As a result, the Board found the petition procedurally defective.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderWCJ ReportDismissalSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural DecisionEvidentiary Decision
References
4
Case No. ADJ7298580
Regular
Mar 19, 2013

JOSE CHAVEZ CHAIDEZ vs. ARDEN GROUP, INC., dba GELSON'S MARKET, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision in favor of Arden Group, Inc. The applicant's petition was rejected because it lacked specific citations to evidence or testimony as required by WCAB Rule 10842. The Board gave great weight to the workers' compensation administrative law judge's credibility findings, further supporting the denial of reconsideration.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDENYING RECONSIDERATIONWCJ REPORTGARZA v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.credibility determinationWCAB Rule 10842recanted testimonyemployer-directed testimonyARIS G. ZURICHADJ7298580
References
1
Case No. ADJ10550101
Regular
Apr 08, 2019

MONALISA JIMENEZ vs. CCI TEHACHAPI, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration and removal. The WCAB found the petition for removal was improperly filed as reconsideration was an adequate remedy. The petition for reconsideration was dismissed because it was "skeletal," failing to meet the specificity requirements of Labor Code § 5902 and Appeals Board Rules regarding citation to the record and detailed grounds.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removalskeletal petitionAOE/COEfinal ordersubstantive rightthreshold issueLabor Code § 5902Appeals Board Rule 10842
References
10
Case No. ADJ7504765
Regular
May 05, 2014

JULIE PRIETO vs. DUC M NGUYEN, M.D.; TRAVELERS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY SACRAMENTO

This case involves applicant's attorney seeking reconsideration of an order approving stipulations for payment of prior attorneys' lien claims. The petition was dismissed because it was "skeletal," lacking specific legal arguments or record citations as required by statute and regulation. Furthermore, the petition failed to demonstrate proper service on all adverse parties. Even if considered on its merits, the petition would have been denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalSkeletal PetitionLien ClaimantAttorneys' FeesStipulations and OrderWCJ Report and RecommendationLabor Code Section 5902California Code of Regulations Title 8 Section 10846
References
1
Case No. ADJ8544680
Regular
Nov 26, 2014

MICHAEL JIMENEZ vs. SP PLUS SECURITY SERVICES, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely, over six months after the original order. The petition also failed to comply with procedural rules, specifically regarding service and proper citation of the decision being challenged. The Board admonished defense counsel for filing a meritless petition, wasting judicial resources, and warned of future sanctions for such conduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJPetition for DismissalAME appointmentsDr. Peter NewtonApplicantDefendantuntimely filingdismissal
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 4,168 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