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. ADJ11317464, ADJ11317437
Regular
Jan 09, 2023

MARISA FISCHBACHA vs. ARDEN GROUP, dba GELSON'S MARKET, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision. However, the parties subsequently reached an informal agreement to resolve all issues in the petition for reconsideration. Consequently, the Board vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the petition. This action renders the WCJ's original decision final through dismissal of the appeal.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRECONSIDERATIONJOINT FINDINGS OF FACT AND ORDERADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGECOMMISSIONERS' SETTLEMENT CONFERENCEINFORMAL AGREEMENTPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONVACATEDDISMISSEDDEPUTY COMMISSIONER
References
Case No. ADJ5774907
Regular
Jan 15, 2014

ROBERT PORTER vs. LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT WAREHOUSE, INC.; SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, overturning a prior order that dismissed the case from the trial calendar. The defendant seeks to litigate the statute of limitations as a threshold issue, arguing it was improperly denied. The Board found that statute of limitations is a threshold issue that can be bifurcated and that the prior denial of a dismissal petition was procedural, not on the merits. The case is returned to the trial level for proceedings on the statute of limitations.

Petition for RemovalStatute of LimitationsJurisdictionRes JudicataThreshold IssueLabor Code Section 5405Affirmative DefenseBifurcationDeclaration of ReadinessOff Calendar
References
Case No. ADJ10948281
Regular
Mar 06, 2023

HELODORO ZAMORA PEREZ vs. RMT CONTRACTING, INC., INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Helodoro Zamora Perez against RMT Contracting, Inc. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was not timely filed. The WCAB explained that a decision resolving a "threshold" issue is a final order, and any challenges must be made through a timely petition for reconsideration. Since the WCJ's decision addressed a threshold issue, it was a final order subject to timely reconsideration. Furthermore, the WCAB stated that even if the petition had been timely, it would have been denied on its merits.

Petition for ReconsiderationThreshold IssueFinal DecisionInterlocutory IssuesRemoval StandardExtraordinary RemedySignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmAdequate RemedyWCAB
References
Case No. ADJ11635947
Regular
Mar 25, 2020

EDMOND WOODS vs. CONTEMPORARY SERVICES CORPORATION, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

Applicant petitioned for reconsideration of a Minute Order that stated "WCJ to issue dismissal without prejudice." The Appeals Board dismissed the petition because the applicant was not aggrieved by a final order, as no such order had yet been issued. A petition for reconsideration can only be taken from a final order that determines substantive rights, liabilities, or a fundamental threshold issue. Since the dismissal order itself had not yet been issued, the petition was premature and thus dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalAggrieved ApplicantFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueBenefitsWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ10129038, ADJ7518514, ADJ7762269
Regular
Oct 09, 2017

RAMON NEVAREZ vs. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant UPS sought reconsideration of a decision deferring the issue of injury to the applicant's right forearm and shoulder. The Board dismissed the petition because reconsideration can only be sought from a "final" order. Deferring an issue, as done in this case, does not determine substantive rights or liabilities, nor does it resolve a threshold issue. Therefore, the order deferring the injury issue was not a final decision, making the petition for reconsideration improper and subject to dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMedical EvidenceBody Part InjuryLibery Mutual Insurance Company
References
Case No. ADJ10558939
Regular
May 21, 2018

GIOVANNI MARTINEZ vs. MENZIES AVIATION USA, INC, GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Giovanni Martinez's Petition for Reconsideration. The petition sought to challenge a Notice of Intent to Issue Sanctions against applicant's law firm. The Board found the petition improper because it was filed before a final order was issued by the Administrative Law Judge. Reconsideration is only permitted from final orders that determine substantive rights or threshold issues.

Notice of Intent to Issue SanctionsPetition for ReconsiderationWaste of Judicial ResourcesVerified PetitionFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory ProceduralAppeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Judge
References
Case No. ADJ10992611
Regular
Aug 07, 2018

MARIA LOPEZ vs. CAR CARE, INC.; REPUBLIC INDEMNITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final order addressing an evidentiary issue. The WCAB found that the order did not determine any substantive rights or liabilities nor a threshold issue. Furthermore, the WCAB denied the applicant's petition for removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCAB concluded that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if a final adverse decision is issued.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removalfinal ordersubstantive rightliabilitythreshold issueinterlocutory proceduralevidentiary issueextraordinary remedy
References
Case No. ADJ10607792
Regular
Sep 30, 2019

DANAE MARTINEZ vs. TRUE LEAF FARMS/PACIFIC RISK MANAGEMENT, PSI, administered by PACIFIC CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. While the WCJ's initial order addressed a threshold issue (injury AOE/COE), the applicant's petition only challenged interlocutory issues regarding QME panels. The WCAB treated this as a request for removal, which is an extraordinary remedy rarely granted. Because the applicant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, and reconsideration remains an adequate remedy for future interlocutory issues, the petition was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationReport of Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judgethreshold issuefinal decisioninjury arising out of and in the course of employmentAOE/COEinterlocutory issuesremoval standardqualified medical evaluator
References
Case No. ADJ10296202, ADJ10296203
Regular
Jan 29, 2020

ANDRIA STREETER vs. GOODWILL SERVING THE PEOPLE OF SOUTHERN LOS ANGELES, UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns defendant's petition for reconsideration or removal of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board denied the petition, finding the decision contained both a threshold issue (injury AOE/COE) making it final for reconsideration, and an interlocutory issue (treatment outside the medical provider network). Because the petition primarily challenged the interlocutory issue, it was evaluated under the more stringent removal standard. The Board found no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm justifying removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationRemovalJoint Findings of FactInjury AOE/COEThreshold IssueInterlocutory IssueMedical Provider NetworkSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
Case No. ADJ13302605; ADJ15813943
Regular
Mar 07, 2023

MATTHEW WARE vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS FOOTBALL CLUB, LLC, GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY C/O BERKLEY ENTERTAINMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, reversing the WCJ's order to set the case for a Mandatory Settlement Conference on all issues. The Board found good cause to bifurcate and try the threshold issues of California subject matter and personal jurisdiction first. Bifurcating these jurisdictional issues is deemed more efficient, as a favorable ruling for the defendant would avoid further litigation. This decision prioritizes an expedited resolution of jurisdiction to facilitate the prompt delivery of potential benefits.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceBifurcationJurisdictionSubject Matter JurisdictionPersonal JurisdictionSpecial AppearanceDeclaration of ReadinessDiscoveryGood Cause
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,599 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