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. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. ADJ8964113
Regular
Jun 24, 2016

LISA LIU vs. ADVENTURER HOTEL, TOWER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claim filed by Tri-County Medical Group for services provided to applicant Lisa Liu. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) dismissed the lien, finding it was filed untimely beyond the 18-month statutory limit. The lien claimant appealed, arguing the filing date of February 2, 2015, was within the period because the 18-month deadline of February 1, 2015, fell on a Sunday, extending the filing to the next business day. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the ALJ's order, and found the lien timely filed. The Board determined that per procedural rules, when the last day falls on a weekend, the deadline extends to the next business day.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4903.5(b)Statute of Limitations18-month periodRules of Practice and ProcedureBusiness DayEAMS RecordJudicial Notice
References
Case No. ADJ10391495
Regular
Jun 20, 2019

EDNA DE LEON, vs. DEPALMA TERRACE SENIOR LIVING; BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES; THE HARTFORD,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Edna De Leon's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The Board noted that California law allows only 25 days to file a petition after a decision is served by mail. De Leon's petition was filed on April 22, 2019, which was more than 25 days after the WCJ's March 25, 2019 decision. The Board emphasized that timely filing is jurisdictional and they lacked authority to consider petitions filed outside this timeframe.

Petition for Reconsiderationuntimelydismissaljurisdictionalservice by mailtime limitWCABWCJdeadline25 days
References
Case No. ADJ9098975
Regular
May 16, 2025

SHELLY REESE vs. COUNTY OF KERN, KERN COUNTY SHERIFF, SHERIFF'S RESERVE ASSOCIATION, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

Shelly Reese, a reserve deputy for the County of Kern, was injured during a motocross demonstration at the 2013 Stampede Days, an annual fundraising event for the Sheriff's Department. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to determine if Reese was an employee under the Workers' Compensation Act. The WCAB found that Reese established a presumption of employment due to receiving remuneration in the form of training and uniforms, therefore overriding the public agency volunteer exclusion. Concluding she was performing peace officer duties, the Board rescinded the prior finding of her as a professional athlete and reclassified her employment as a Peace Officer, Occupational Group Number 490.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationReserve DeputyStampede DaysMotocross DemonstrationProfessional AthletePeace OfficerLabor Code Sections 335133573352(a)(9)
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. ADJ3854591 (VNO 0264467)
Regular
Jan 07, 2020

ANDRZEJ WASOWICZ vs. J.L. FISHER, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the timeliness of a Utilization Review (UR) denial for requested medical treatment. The applicant argued the UR denial was untimely because it was issued on the 15th calendar day, exceeding the 14-day statutory limit under Labor Code section 4610(i)(1). The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the prior decision that found the UR timely. The Board determined the UR denial was indeed untimely and remanded the case for a new decision on the medical necessity of the treatment.

Utilization ReviewRequest for Authorizationtimelinesscalendar daysworking daysjurisdictionmedical necessityLabor CodeFindings of FactPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ7270261
Regular
Mar 01, 2012

MEKAL FARUKI vs. MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORES

This case involves Mekal Faruki's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board dismissed the petition as untimely. Labor Code section 5903 establishes a strict 20-day deadline for filing reconsideration petitions, with a possible 5-day extension for mailing. Critically, the petition is considered filed upon receipt, not mailing date. Faruki's petition was filed over 25 days after the December 10, 2010 decision, rendering it jurisdictionally barred.

Mekal FarukiMacy's Department StoresPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903WCAB Rule 10507Jurisdictional Time LimitDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSacramento District Office
References
Case No. ADJ11166250
Regular
Aug 18, 2025

Diane Clay vs. County of Los Angeles, Tristar

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Diane Clay against County of Los Angeles and Tristar. The Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report. The primary issue was the timeliness of the petition. According to Labor Code section 5909, the Appeals Board must act on a petition within 60 days of transmission, and a petition must be filed within 25 days of a final decision. The Board found that the petition, filed on June 11, 2025, was more than 25 days after the Findings of Fact and Order issued on May 14, 2025, making it untimely. As untimeliness is a jurisdictional issue, the Board lacked authority to consider it on merits. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissalLabor Code section 5909Appeals Board60-day periodtransmissionEAMSservice of report25-day limit
References
Case No. VNO 0454707
Regular
Aug 23, 2007

JOSE FRANCO vs. FURNITURE RESOURCES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Jose Franco's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. Labor Code section 5903 establishes a strict 20-day filing deadline, extendable by 5 days for mailing, for petitions for reconsideration. This case was dismissed because the petition was filed over 25 days after the Workers' Compensation Judge's decision was served, rendering the filing jurisdictionally defective.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationTimelinessLabor Code Section 5903jurisdictionaldismissal20-day limit5-day mailing extensiondeemed filedactual receipt
References
Case No. ADJ2006433 (LAO 0799986) ADJ2790090 (LBO 0278759)
Regular
Sep 03, 2010

ORANGE PORTER vs. WESTEC GEAR CORPORATION, CNA CASUALTY OF CALIFORNIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it was based on an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision on substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB had previously rescinded a prior award to correct errors and clarify issues, returning the matter to the Workers' Compensation Judge for further proceedings. Additionally, the applicant's claim that the WCAB exceeded the 60-day deadline for acting on the defendant's petition was rejected, as the decision was issued on the next business day after a furlough holiday.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionInterlocutory OrderFinal OrderLabor Code § 5909Sixty Day RuleFurlough DayExecutive OrderTemporary Disability
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,154 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