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. ADJ4174522 (RIV 0075013)
Regular
Jan 31, 2014

ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ vs. SPECTRUM CUSTOM DESIGN, PINNACLE

This case involves petitions for reconsideration from Dr. Ronald Grusd and California Imaging Network (CIN) regarding the dismissal of their liens by the WCJ. CIN's petition was dismissed as facially defective because no lien for them was identified in the file. Dr. Grusd's petition was denied because he failed to appear at a lien conference and did not object to the subsequent notice of intent to dismiss, and his claim of excusable neglect was unsubstantiated. The Board found no good cause to overturn the WCJ's justified dismissal of the liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalLien ClaimantExcusable NeglectLien ConferenceNotice of Intention to DismissBoard Rule 10562WCJCompromise and Release
References
0
Case No. ADJ2140810 (OAK 0294314) ADJ1780104 (WCK 0046461)
Regular
Jan 29, 2010

Monica Meadors vs. Oakland Unified School District

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Monica Meadors' petition for reconsideration and removal. The petition was untimely, seeking reconsideration of a December 2008 order to attend a QME exam, which was outside the statutory filing period. Furthermore, the petition failed to address any specific order, finding, or award subject to review. The Board also remanded the matter to the trial level for consideration of declaring the applicant a vexatious litigant due to her history of filing repetitive and unsubstantiated complaints.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPanel QMEVexatious litigantLabor Code section 5903Government Code Section 905(d)Permanent disabilityDate of injuryLiability denied
References
5
Case No. ADJ10909880
Regular
Mar 04, 2019

JASON GARNER (DECEASED) vs. COUNTY OF STANISLAUS SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petitioner's request for reconsideration and dismissed their petition for removal. The WCAB found the petition for reconsideration to be skeletal, failing to specifically detail the grounds for relief or cite relevant evidence and legal principles. Furthermore, removal was dismissed as it is an extraordinary remedy not warranted by the petitioner's unsubstantiated claims. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge in their decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardInjury Arising Out of and Occurring in the Course of EmploymentAOE/COEFinal OrderThreshold IssueSkeletal PetitionLabor Code § 5902Appeals Board Rules
References
12
Case No. ADJ2715287(MF) (MON 0077582)
Regular
Jan 23, 2013

CURTIS IVORY WARD vs. TECHNICOLOR, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for removal, finding it untimely and lacking in demonstration of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCAB also denied the applicant's petition for disqualification of the WCJ, deeming the supporting declaration defective and the allegations unsubstantiated. The applicant alleged the WCJ showed bias and enmity, and failed to sanction the defendant for discovery issues. The WCAB concluded that reconsideration of the WCJ's final decision would be an adequate remedy.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor Code Sections 5310Labor Code Sections 5311Appeals Board Rule 10452Administrative Law JudgeSimone BlaisIndependent Medical Examiner
References
2
Case No. ADJ15495436
Regular
Feb 18, 2025

Calvin Grigsby vs. Grigsby and Associates, State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board considered two petitions from the applicant, Calvin Grigsby: a December 9, 2024 Petition for Reconsideration and/or Removal, and a December 24, 2024 Petition for Removal. The Board dismissed the reconsideration aspect of the December 9th petition as it pertained to non-final orders and denied removal, finding no demonstration of irreparable harm. The subsequent December 24th petition was also dismissed as it challenged the same December 4, 2024 orders. The Board also noted the applicant's failure to comply with page limits for the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalNonfinal OrdersLabor Code Section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionsSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmSupplemental Pleadings
References
15
Case No. VNO 400995
Regular
Aug 30, 2007

ANA HERRERA vs. DIANE And JOE GUZMAN, DBA HITCHING POST FEED AND PET SUPPLY, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, finding their arguments about the applicant's medical expert's reporting unsubstantiated. However, the Board granted the applicant's petition, rescinding the previous award. This action was taken because the applicant was denied due process by the concurrent service of the decision and the Disability Evaluator's report, which prevented her from cross-examining the rater. The case is returned for further proceedings and a new decision.

AOE/COEPermanent DisabilityApportionmentQualified Medical ExaminerMedical ReportingSubstantial EvidencePetition for ReconsiderationDisability EvaluatorDue ProcessCross-examination
References
8
Case No. ADJ7768905
Regular
Sep 13, 2016

TRACEY LOMBARDI vs. SCRIPPS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition, which sought disqualification of the administrative law judge, removal, and reconsideration. The disqualification petition was denied as untimely, filed after the swearing of the first witness. The removal petition failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Finally, the reconsideration petition was dismissed because it did not seek review of a final order, but rather an interlocutory procedural decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5311Appeals Board Rule 10452Untimely PetitionExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
6
Case No. ADJ10778928
Regular
Dec 10, 2018

DINA CASTILLO vs. AMERICAN APPAREL USA, LLC, Administered by CORVEL CORPORATION, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Adjusted by ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Disqualification of the WCJ. The Board found the petition lacked specific factual allegations required by rule, failing to establish grounds for bias or prejudgment under relevant code sections. Consequently, the petition was denied, and the applicant's attorney received an admonishment for filing a non-compliant petition and making unsubstantiated allegations.

Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ DisqualificationCode of Civil Procedure section 641Labor Code section 5311Appeals Board Rule 10452Affidavit or DeclarationPenalty of PerjuryGrounds for DisqualificationBias and Prejudice
References
1
Case No. ADJ1515176 (AHM 0150456)
Regular
Jan 20, 2012

TERESA AVINA vs. TACO BELL, YUM! BRANDS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT

Both Defendant and Lien Claimant petitioned for reconsideration of the WCJ's decision. The Defendant argued that costs awarded to the Lien Claimant for appearing on May 12, 2011, were unsubstantiated and that their request to remove the trial from the calendar was made in good faith. The Lien Claimant argued for an earlier start date for penalties and interest due to an alleged EAMS error. The Appeals Board granted both petitions, amending the award to defer the issue of costs for the May 12, 2011 appearance and deferring the effective date of interest accrual, returning the case for further proceedings.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantDeclaration of Readiness (DOR)Labor Code section 5813CostsInterestEAMSTrial BriefFindings & Award & Order (F&A)
References
5
Case No. ADJ3808038 (LAO 0819022)
Regular
Feb 11, 2010

NICOLAS F. BENINKOFF (Deceased), LORENA BENINKOFF (Widow) vs. DARCO METAL SURFACING, INC.; and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board denied petitions for removal and reconsideration from lien claimants and the defendant, and denied the applicant's reconsideration petition. Lien claimants Kan and Ace's petition for removal was denied as they failed to show substantial prejudice, and their reconsideration petition was dismissed as the prior order was not final. The applicant's reconsideration petition was denied because her claim for home healthcare services was deemed an untimely lien claim under Labor Code section 4903.5.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalReconsiderationLien ClaimantsUntimely LienLabor Code section 4903.5Labor Code section 5405Home Healthcare ServicesMedical TreatmentTransportation Expenses
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 14,160 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