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. ADJ7970557 ADJ7234375
Regular
Aug 01, 2016

LAURA MIRANDA vs. EL SUPER MARKET, PACIFIC COMPENSATION/NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision barring their lien for medical services. The WCJ found the lien untimely under Labor Code section 4903.5(a) because it was filed more than 18 months after the last date of service, which occurred after July 1, 2013. The Appeals Board agreed, clarifying that the 18-month limit applies to services provided on or after July 1, 2013, and the filing on September 24, 2015, was indeed too late. The Board found the lien claimant had a reasonable time to file given the statutory amendment's effective date.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 4903.5(a)Joint Findings and OrderWCJTimelinessDate of Services18-month limitation period
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. ADJ6923711
Regular
May 02, 2013

OSCAR VIZCARRA vs. APPLIED RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Oscar Vizcarra's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on March 28, 2013, which was more than twenty days after the WCJ's decision was personally served on February 28, 2013. Because the decision was personally served, no mailing extension applied. The WCAB correctly applied Labor Code section 5903, noting that filing a petition for reconsideration outside the jurisdictional time limit mandates dismissal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Jurisdictional Time LimitPersonally ServedMailing ExtensionCode of Civil Procedure Section 1013WCAB Rule 10507Date of Receipt
References
Case No. ADJ87-41561
Regular
Mar 18, 2016

OMAYRA GUERRERO vs. EASY STAFFING, LUMBERMEN'S UNDERWRITING ALLIANCE

This case concerns a lien claim filed by Advance Care Specialist Medical Clinic (ACSMC) for services provided to an injured worker. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied ACSMC's petition for reconsideration, affirming a prior order that barred the lien as untimely filed under Labor Code section 4903.5(a). The majority found that since the last date of service was September 23, 2013, after the July 1, 2013 amendment, the 18-month filing limitation applied, and ACSMC's August 19, 2015 filing was too late. The dissenting opinion argued that for continuously provided services spanning before and after July 1, 2013, the three-year limitation should apply to avoid requiring multiple lien filings and prevent absurd results.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code 4903.5(a)Statute of LimitationsLien ClaimReconsiderationLast Date of Service18-month limitation period3-year limitation periodRetroactive applicationReasonable time
References
Case No. ADJ8847768
Regular
Aug 31, 2015

RAUL VAZQUEZ vs. THE MILLARD GROUP, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICE GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Raul Vazquez's petition for reconsideration against The Millard Group and its insurer. The Board found the petition was untimely filed, exceeding the 25-day jurisdictional deadline after the Workers' Compensation Judge's decision was served. Proof of mailing alone is insufficient; the petition must be received by the Board within the statutory period. Therefore, the Board lacked the authority to consider the merits of the petition, which would have been denied anyway based on the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWCAB RulesWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeService by MailProof of MailingDismissalLegal Precedent
References
Case No. ADJ2610658 (BAK 0153868)
Regular
Sep 14, 2012

EUNICE WHELDON vs. GOLDEN EMPIRE TRANSIT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse a prior decision, finding the applicant's claim barred by the statute of limitations. The applicant, a bus driver, injured her knees in 2005 but did not file a claim until May 2008 and received medical treatment in 2010. Although the employer did not provide the statutory notice of rights, the Board found this was not required as the applicant lost no time from work and initially stated she did not need medical treatment beyond first aid. Therefore, the Board concluded the employer was not estopped from raising the statute of limitations defense.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGolden Empire Transitindustrial injurybilateral kneestemporary disabilityfurther medical treatmentLabor Code section 5401(a)statute of limitationstollingApplication for Adjudication of Claim
References
Case No. ADJ1169918 (VNO 0532601)
Regular
Apr 23, 2015

TERESA SALAZAR vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Teresa Salazar's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on April 1, 2015, which was more than the 25-day jurisdictional deadline following the WCJ's December 30, 2014 decision. The WCAB lacks authority to consider petitions filed outside this statutory period. Therefore, the petition was dismissed, and had it been timely, it would have been denied on the merits.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportJurisdictional Time LimitService by MailExtension of TimePosting vs. FilingLegal Precedent
References
Case No. AD.J9720531, AD.J9720533
Regular
Apr 28, 2016

JULIA HERRERA DE GRADILLA vs. MERCHANTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Julia Herrera De Gradilla's petition for reconsideration. The WCAB found the petition to be untimely, as it was filed over 25 days after the arbitrator's decision was served. California law mandates that petitions for reconsideration must be received by the WCAB within the statutory time limit, and late filings deprive the board of jurisdiction. The WCAB further noted that even if timely, the petition would have been denied on its merits based on the arbitrator's report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalArbitrator's ReportLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictional Time LimitMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. Hagler
References
Case No. ADJ2344107
Regular
Jun 23, 2014

RODRIGO ROJAS vs. ATTAI NDA MESSOU

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. The petitioner had actual notice of the Order Approving Compromise and Release by January 22, 2014, and the petition was not filed until April 28, 2014. Labor Code section 5903 mandates a 20-day filing window for such petitions, and exceeding this limit is a jurisdictional defect. Therefore, the Board lacked the authority to grant the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Actual NoticeOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseJurisdictional Time LimitAppeals BoardWCJ Report and RecommendationSupplemental LetterDismissed Petition
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
Showing 1-10 of 3,816 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