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. ADJ8843441
Regular
Oct 16, 2013

AUSTIN KWOMO vs. LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's order to take the case off calendar. The Board found the WCJ prematurely ordered further medical record development before trial or submission for decision. Therefore, the case is returned to the trial level for proceedings consistent with *McDuffie*, with the WCJ retaining discretion to supplement the record *after* trial if necessary. The petition for disqualification of the WCJ was denied.

Petition for RemovalOrder Off CalendarFurther Development of RecordMedical OpinionsThreshold MatterTrialSubmission for DecisionExhibitsWitnessesSupplementation of Medical Record
References
1
Case No. ADJ6524117
Regular
Mar 24, 2014

Norma Rodriguez vs. Norman Sigel, M.D., Employers Compensation Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Employers Compensation Insurance Company's petition to remove a WCJ's order compelling applicant attendance at trial. The Board found the WCJ erred by ordering applicant testimony before a trial record was established and discovery closed. The order compelling attendance was rescinded, and the case returned for trial; the WCJ may allow applicant testimony if she appears voluntarily.

Petition for RemovalDiscovery ClosureMandatory Settlement ConferenceDue DiligenceAOE/COEStipulated AwardPetition for ContributionIndispensable PartyLay Witness TestimonyEvidentiary Record
References
1
Case No. ADJ7471626
Regular
Dec 16, 2011

MARINA BILAVER vs. HOLLYWOOD RENAISSANCE HOTEL/MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

This case involves applicant Marina Billaver's petition for removal, which was denied. Applicant sought to depose a panel Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) before trial, but the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) closed discovery and set the case for trial. The WCJ found applicant failed to adequately justify the necessity of the QME deposition or explain prior cancellations, especially since defendant represented the case was ready for trial. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and denied the petition.

Petition for RemovalMinute OrderWCJDiscovery ClosureTrial SettingPanel QMEDr. ShlensMandatory Settlement ConferenceDOREAMS
References
0
Case No. ADJ7213550
Regular
Dec 30, 2013

MAURICIO AREVALOS vs. MCMANIS FAMILY VINEYARDS, MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP

The defendant sought removal, arguing that lien claimants failed to provide evidence supporting their claims, which had been dismissed and then twice reinstated by the WCJ. The Appeals Board granted removal, finding the WCJ improperly rescinded dismissal orders without a proper record, trial, or admitted evidence. While acknowledging the WCJ's attempt to preserve resources, the Board noted the elapsed trial date. The case is now returned to the trial level for setting and resolution, with discovery closed as of November 15, 2011.

Petition for RemovalRescinded OrderLien ClaimsCompromise and ReleaseLien ConferencePretrial Conference StatementDismissed LiensPetition for ReconsiderationSubmitted on the RecordAdmitted Evidence
References
1
Case No. ADJ9549383
Regular
Jul 10, 2017

JUANA ZELEDON DE TREMINIO vs. ESPOSTOS FINE FOODS INC. dba BOX LUNCH CO.

The defendant sought removal of the WCJ's orders to reopen discovery and take the case off calendar, arguing the applicant lacked due diligence. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's minute orders, and returned the case for trial without further discovery. The Board found the WCJ erred by taking the case off calendar and reopening discovery before trial, as there was no established record of deficient medical reports to justify such actions. The question of due diligence and substantial evidence should be determined based on admitted evidence at trial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalMinute OrdersReopening DiscoveryOff CalendarDue DiligencePrejudicialIrreparably HarmfulMedical Provider Network (MPN)Continuity of Care
References
2
Case No. ADJ2061639 (VNO 0553366) ADJ4481677 (VNO 0553364)
Regular
Sep 25, 2013

ARACELY MENJIVAR vs. NESTLE USA, INC., AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO.

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in four sentences: The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's orders to take the matters off calendar for medical record development prior to trial. The Board found the WCJ prematurely ordered record development without first establishing deficiencies in existing medical opinions after evidence admission. Consequently, the cases are returned to the trial level for proper trial proceedings. The Board denied the defendant's request to remove the WCJ, as it failed to meet statutory disqualification requirements.

Petition for RemovalOff CalendarMedical Record DevelopmentThreshold MatterDeficient Medical OpinionsTrial LevelDisqualification of WCJSection 5311WCAB Rule 10452Affidavit/Declaration
References
1
Case No. ADJ441410
Regular
Oct 03, 2008

HAYDEE NUNEZ vs. FAIRMONT MIRAMAR HOTEL, COMMERCE & INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's denial of the remaining lien balance. The Board is returning the case to the trial level to investigate potential sanctions against the lien claimant for its actions in filing the petition for reconsideration, citing alleged procedural defects and bad faith. The WCJ's original finding was that the outpatient fusion surgery was not permitted under Medicare Guidelines and the defendant paid more than the reasonable value of the services.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardFairmont Miramar HotelCommerce & Industry Insurance CompanyAIG Domestic ClaimsOutpatient Spine & Surgery CenterLien claimantIndustrial injuryLow back injuryOutpatient fusion surgeryMedicare Guidelines
References
1
Case No. ADJ10068763, ADJ10567862, ADJ10694876, ADJ10758465
Regular
Jul 03, 2016

NAHIDEH SARRAFIEH vs. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal due to a procedural error by the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The WCJ erroneously set the case for trial after issuing a confusing "Notice of Hearing Cancellation" which led applicant's counsel to believe the hearing was cancelled. Despite applicant's counsel appearing and objecting, the WCJ proceeded to set the trial, failing to provide adequate notice. The Appeals Board rescinded the trial setting order and remanded the case for a new Mandatory Settlement Conference to ensure proper notice and preparation.

Petition for RemovalNotice of Hearing CancellationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDue ProcessObjectionsTrial SettingRescind OrderReturn for MSCWCJ OpinionAppeals Board Decision
References
3
Case No. ADJ1393892
Regular
Aug 16, 2011

JOSE NAVARRO vs. LOCKHEED

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration regarding an alleged March 12, 1990 injury, upholding the WCJ's finding that no industrial injury occurred. The Board granted removal on its own motion to address potential sanctions against applicant's counsel for citing medical records not present in the official record, which is a violation of WCAB rules and attorney ethics. The Board issued a Notice of Intention to impose $1,000 in sanctions jointly against the attorney and his firm, and awarded attorney's fees to the defendant. Other outstanding issues in the consolidated cases are returned to the trial level for further proceedings by the WCJ.

Petition for ReconsiderationQualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidenceCredibility DeterminationMisleading PetitionSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813WCAB RulesAttorney's DutyEvidence Outside Record
References
4
Case No. ADJ885979 (LBO 0310057)
Regular
Feb 20, 2014

WALTER CERVANTES vs. UNITED AIRLINES INFLIGHT SERVICES, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal to address the WCJ's exclusion of the Labor Code section 5402 presumption of compensability. The Board held that this presumption can be raised for the first time at trial, even if not listed on the pre-trial conference statement. The case is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the presumption, ensuring the defendant has an opportunity to present evidence and witnesses on the issue. This decision aligns with precedent allowing presumptions to be raised at trial under certain circumstances.

Petition for RemovalPresumption of CompensabilityLabor Code Section 5402Mandatory Settlement ConferencePretrial Conference StatementWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJOrder Granting PetitionDecision After RemovalDue Process
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 9,866 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