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. ADJ2820557 (RDG 0106325), ADJ3301737 (RDG 0110776)
Regular
Oct 18, 2011

DEAN LAGOE vs. GRASS VALLEY FORD by RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT

The defendant, Grass Valley Ford, petitioned for removal to vacate an order vacating submission, arguing irreparable harm from ongoing temporary disability payments. The WCJ vacated submission due to an insufficient evidentiary record lacking stipulations on temporary disability payments and claimant's claims. The Appeals Board denied the petition, finding the WCJ was correct that a sufficient record was needed for a proper decision. The case is remanded for further proceedings to develop the record.

Petition for RemovalVacating SubmissionInsufficient EvidenceTemporary Disability IndemnityIrreparable HarmStipulated AwardsEAMSCumulative TraumaAmended Minutes of HearingStipulation
References
Case No. ADJ8040191
Regular
Sep 18, 2013

JOEL GOODEN vs. HILLS PET NUTRITION, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The defendant petitioned for removal, seeking to overturn an order vacating submission of the case for further medical record development. The administrative law judge (WCJ) had vacated submission to review PQME reports from Dr. Georgis and Dr. Francisco. The WCJ subsequently took the matter off calendar to allow parties to obtain a supplemental report from the PQME reviewing Dr. Francisco's report. As the issue raised by the defendant's petition is now moot due to the subsequent order, the Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal.

Petition for RemovalVacating SubmissionPQMESupplemental ReportWCJOff CalendarMootAppeals BoardWorkers' CompensationCase Development
References
Case No. ADJ11225851
Regular
Oct 18, 2019

SUZAN ELSHAMI vs. C & A RESTAURANTS INC.; SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION, administered by BROADSPIRE

This case involves an applicant challenging a WCJ's decision regarding a Medical Provider Network (MPN) issue. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to amend the order vacating submission, instructing further record development without vacating submission. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding of injury AOE/COE, a threshold issue, while deeming the MPN development order interlocutory. The Board clarified that for MPN compliance, the network only needs at least three available primary treating physicians of an appropriate specialty within access standards.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalVacating SubmissionFurther Development of RecordThreshold IssueFinal DecisionInterlocutory IssueInjury Arising Out of and in the Course of Employment (AOE/COE)Medical Provider Network (MPN)
References
Case No. ADJ4182816 (SJO 0253240)
Regular
Mar 09, 2009

MAROOF KHAN vs. MANCO INVESTMENTS, ATLANTIC MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and vacated a prior award because the arbitrator failed to issue a decision within the 30-day statutory limit under Labor Code section 5277. This failure resulted in the forfeiture of the arbitrator's fee and vacated the submission order and stipulations. The case is remanded to the presiding judge for reassignment to a new arbitration due to the violation of mandatory arbitration procedures.

WCABReconsiderationCumulative TraumaContributionLabor Code Section 5277ForfeitureVacatedSubmission OrderStipulationsPresiding Workers' Compensation Judge
References
Case No. ADJ9060378
Regular
Apr 21, 2014

MELISSA OVERTON vs. THE PAPER BAG PRINCESS, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a dispute over applicant Melissa Overton's deposition, specifically regarding the presence of an employer representative and videotaping. A WCJ vacated a prior submission order to compel a psychiatric evaluation to assess the applicant's fitness for deposition under those conditions. The defendant sought removal, arguing the WCJ erred in vacating submission and ordering further discovery. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's order and submission order, and returned the case for reassignment to a new WCJ to resolve the discovery dispute.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating SubmissionFurther DiscoveryProtective OrdersDeposition LocationEmployer RepresentativePsychiatric EvaluationIndustrial InjuryCumulative TraumaWCJ Reassignment
References
Case No. ADJ1804697
Regular
Nov 28, 2012

LETICIA CHIAS vs. GRILL CONCEPTS, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES/CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for PACIFIC NATIONAL in liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Removal because it was unverified, violating WCAB Rule 10843(b). The defendant sought to rescind an order vacating submission due to a bill review dispute, arguing against the cost of an additional reviewer. The WCAB also noted a failure to include the attorney's state bar number. While dismissing the petition, the WCAB indicated that, had they reached the merits, the case would likely have been returned for decision on the existing record.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating Order of SubmissionOrder Taking Off CalendarOrder of SubmissionBill ReviewIndependent Bill ReviewerCalifornia Insurance Guaranty AssociationCIGAWCAB Rule 10843(b)Verification
References
Case No. ADJ9398564
Regular
Jun 12, 2018

JEROME POLAND vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The applicant, Jerome Poland, filed a Petition for Reconsideration without his attorney in response to a notice of intention to disallow his claim. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) subsequently issued an "Order Vacating Submission" in response to this petition. Citing WCAB Rule 10859, which allows a WCJ to amend or rescind a decision within fifteen days of a reconsideration petition, the Board dismissed the applicant's petition. This dismissal was based on the WCJ's action in vacating submission within the allowable timeframe.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DisallowWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeOrder Vacating SubmissionWCAB Rule 10859Amend or ModifyRescindFurther ProceedingsDismissed Petition
References
Case No. ADJ3858007 (SBR 0314079)
Regular
May 26, 2016

RONALD STEFFY vs. H STREET COLLISION CENTER, INC., FARMERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal of an Order Vacating Submission. The judge vacated submission to further develop the record due to insufficient evidence, finding the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinions unpersuasive after reviewing medical records and sub rosa video evidence. The Board found the order did not cause significant prejudice or irreparable harm, as it allows for a complete adjudication of issues, including medication usage and permanent disability. Further medical-legal examinations were ordered to develop a record capable of supporting findings on impairment and causation.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating SubmissionAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)McDuffieLabor Code section 5701sub rosa videoinsubstantial evidencepermanent disabilitycausationvocational rehabilitation
References
Case No. ADJ892953 (LAO 0863530) ADJ4178497 (POM 0234792)
Regular
Jul 02, 2012

FELICIDAD MCINTOSH vs. GOLDEN STATE FOODS, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final order vacating the Order of Submission. The WCAB also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCJ vacated the submission to allow for the development of the record regarding apportionment, which was inadequately addressed in the agreed medical examiner reports. The WCAB clarified that reconsideration is only available for final orders, and removal is an extraordinary remedy reserved for cases demonstrating substantial prejudice or irreparable injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Vacating Order of SubmissionAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)CausationApportionmentBurden of ProofFinal OrderSubstantive Rights
References
Case No. ADJ4192390 (SFO 0498367)
Regular
May 28, 2010

BRUCE MITCHELL vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration and denied their petition for removal. The defendant sought to overturn an order that vacated submission, arguing it violated due process and wrongly linked the applicant's 132a discrimination claim to diminished future earning capacity. The WCAB found the vacated order was not final and that the 132a claim was indeed relevant and inextricably related to the earning capacity issue. Therefore, the WCAB affirmed the WCJ's decision to further develop the record, finding no substantial prejudice to the defendant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Setting Aside DispositionLabor Code section 132adiminished future earnings capacityOgilvie v. City and County of San FranciscoMandatory Settlement Conferencestipulationdeferral
References
Showing 1-10 of 525 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