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. LBO 0384614
Regular
Jan 23, 2008

CAROLINA SALES vs. ROSS STORES, INC. and XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE, MJO STAFFING and AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order vacating a Compromise and Release (C&R). The Board then granted reconsideration on its own motion to rescind the original C&R approval. This action affirmed the WCJ's decision to vacate the C&R, effectively returning the parties to their pre-settlement status, due to the applicant's expressed confusion and potential lack of full understanding of the agreement's terms.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationOrder VacatingFinal OrderLabor Code Section 5900Good CauseUnverified PetitionIndustrial InjuryApplicant's UnderstandingWCJ Discretion
References
Case No. ADJ9120917, ADJ6899995
Regular
Sep 16, 2016

RICK STEIN vs. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH

The WCAB dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's order vacating a prior order approving a compromise and release was not a final order. The Board granted the defendant's petition for removal to amend the vacating order, specifying the matter should be set for a status conference. This action was taken under WCAB Rule 10859, allowing the WCJ to rescind an order and conduct further proceedings within 30 days. The case is returned to the WCJ to determine if good cause exists to set aside the compromise and release.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseOrder Vacating Order Approving Compromise and ReleaseWCJLabor Code Section 132(a)Cumulative Trauma InjuryLeft Knee Injury
References
Case No. ADJ6800117
Regular
Oct 30, 2013

JUANITA LUCAS vs. WALGREENS DISTRIBUTION CENTER, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration of an order vacating a Compromise and Release. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was not taken from a "final" order that determined substantive rights. The WCAB also denied removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. However, the WCAB noted that the administrative law judge should have set the matter for a conference to determine good cause to set aside the order rather than vacating it directly.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition to Set Aside Compromise and ReleaseVacating OrderLabor Code §5900
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. ADJ7044674
Regular
Apr 12, 2010

AHMAD SADIGHI vs. CITY OF DALY CITY, INNOVATIVE CLAIMS

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order vacating a compromise and release was not a final order. However, the Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and returned the case for further proceedings. This action was taken to ensure the defendant's due process rights by providing them notice and an opportunity to present evidence and arguments regarding the applicant's request to vacate the settlement. The WCJ should have scheduled a hearing or issued a notice allowing parties to address the merits of vacating the compromise and release.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Vacating Order Approving Compromise and ReleaseDue ProcessEvidentiary HearingFinal OrderLabor Code Section 5900Substantive Rights and LiabilitiesNotice and Opportunity to Be Heard
References
Case No. ADJ9859125
Regular
Aug 04, 2017

CHRISTOPHER E. RENFRO vs. YOUNGS COMMERCIAL TRANSFER, NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE

The Board dismissed the applicant's untimely Petition for Reconsideration of an order compelling blood testing. Removal was granted on the Board's own motion to address procedural issues concerning the WCJ's subsequent vacating orders. The Board affirmed the vacating orders, finding the original order non-final and the subsequent actions invalid due to procedural errors. The matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationGrant RemovalOrder VacatingBlood Panel TestingIndependent Medical EvaluatorPro PerTimelinessJurisdictionalFinal Order
References
Case No. ADJ4139709
Regular
Jan 14, 2010

JORGE HERRERA vs. ROMANO'S MACARONI GRILL, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Applicant filed a petition for reconsideration from a non-final Notice of Intention to Dismiss, which is procedurally improper. Simultaneously, a different judge approved a Compromise and Release Agreement on the same day the petition was filed, an action beyond the judge's authority once the petition was pending. The Board dismissed the Applicant's petition for reconsideration and, on its own motion, granted reconsideration of the approved Compromise and Release. Consequently, the Order Approving Compromise and Release was vacated and the matter remanded for further consideration of the agreement.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalMandatory Settlement ConferenceCompromise and Release AgreementNotice of Intention to DismissWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJEAMSLabor CodeFinal Order
References
Case No. ADJ2931217(VNO 0518954)
Regular
Sep 16, 2011

JOSE ROSAS vs. ACAPULCO RESTAURANT, ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY c/o GALLAGHER BASSETT

This case involves a lien claimant, Superior Chiropractic Care, seeking reconsideration or removal of an order vacating a previous order allowing its lien. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because the vacated order was not a final order subject to reconsideration. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The lien claimant may reassert its claim at the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Allowing LienVacating OrderEx Parte BasisFinal OrderSubstantive RightsIrreparable HarmTrial Level
References
Case No. ADJ10496894
Regular
Aug 25, 2017

Thurman Rogers, Jr. vs. CSI ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Thurman Rogers, Jr.'s Petition for Reconsideration. The petition sought review of an interim order vacating prior findings, which is not a final order from which reconsideration can be sought. The Board found the applicant's arguments regarding union dispute resolution procedures were without merit in this context. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as improperly filed.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Vacating OrderRule 10843International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkersIBEW Local 100alternative dispute resolutionfinal ordersubstantive right
References
Case No. ADJ9998190, ADJ9998275
Regular
Nov 09, 2015

HERMINIA A. PAREDES vs. AMERICANA ACTIVEWEAR, LLC, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant seeking reconsideration of an order suspending her right to collect compensation in two separate case numbers. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration. They vacated the suspension order in one case because a subsequent order addressing the issue was mistakenly issued for only one of the two cases. Both matters are now returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a conference.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder SuspendingOrder VacatingWCJAppeals Board Rule 10859ADJ9998190ADJ9998275ConferenceTrial LevelVacated
References
Showing 1-10 of 8,664 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