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. 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. ADJ9997985, ADJ9997986, ADJ10037755
Regular
Apr 10, 2017

DAVID LIVINGSTON vs. SOUTHEAST PERSONNEL LEASING, INC.;, PACKARD CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION;, STATE NATIONAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for removal filed by the defendant. The WCAB found the petition was untimely because it was filed one day after the 20-day deadline for removal following personal service. This deadline is jurisdictional, and the WCAB cannot consider petitions filed outside this timeframe. Therefore, the petition was dismissed with no request for supplemental pleading granted.

Petition for RemovalUntimely FilingPersonal ServiceWCJ DecisionAppeals Board RuleJurisdictional Time LimitSupplemental PleadingWCAB Rule 10848WCAB Rule 10843WCAB Rule 10507
References
Case No. ADJ203531 (MON 0266113)
Regular
May 28, 2013

WILLIE GOINGS vs. WERNER ENTERPRISES, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration and Petition for Removal. The applicant sought to overturn a stipulation where a lien claimant, CCHN, was awarded payment and agreed to terminate services, arguing he was aggrieved and the judge should have been reassigned. The Board found the applicant lacked standing to object to the stipulation between other parties and had waived any reassignment objection by participating in hearings. Furthermore, while the judge technically erred in rescinding a separate submission order, the applicant suffered no prejudice as their reconsideration petition was properly forwarded and addressed.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalStipulation and OrderLien ClaimantContinuity Care Home NursingCCHNHome Health Care ServicesWCJAutomatic Reassignment
References
Case No. ADJ358640 (ANA 0408299)
Regular
Dec 13, 2017

JOSE BASULTO vs. BREA ROOFING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In *Basulto v. Brea Roofing*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The WCAB emphasized that the 25-day filing deadline for reconsideration is jurisdictional and requires the petition to be *received* by the Board, not merely mailed, within that period. The petition in this case was filed 26 days after the WCJ's decision, exceeding the statutory timeframe. Therefore, the WCAB lacked the authority to review the petition on its merits.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeService by MailJurisdictional Time LimitProof of MailingWCAB Rule 10507WCAB Rule 10508WCAB Rule 10845
References
Case No. ADJ10364681
Regular
Jul 18, 2016

GREGORIO ROMERO vs. LA MARRIOTT HOTEL, MARRIOTT CLAIMS SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was untimely. California law strictly enforces the jurisdictional deadline for filing petitions for reconsideration, and proof of mailing is insufficient; the petition must be received by the WCAB within the prescribed 25-day period. The WCAB found that the petition was filed well beyond this deadline, rendering it void and without legal effect.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWCAB Rule 10507WCAB Rule 10508WCAB Rule 10845WCAB Rule 10392Service by MailProof of FilingAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ9267687
Regular
Apr 02, 2019

NORMA DE JESUS ZARAGOZA vs. FRANCHISE INVESTMENT CORPORATION dba ROUND TABLE PIZZA and TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE/FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board imposed a $500 sanction against applicant's attorney, Peter T. Nguyen, and his law firm. This sanction arose from attaching over 325 pages of exhibits, many not in evidence, to a petition, violating WCAB rules regarding page limits and proper exhibit submission. The attorney's claim of inexperience was rejected, as attorneys are responsible for knowing and adhering to procedural rules, and zealous advocacy does not excuse rule violations. The Board also noted the attorney's failure to adequately cite the trial record in support of his petition.

WCABRemovalSanctionsLabor Code section 5813WCAB Rule 10561WCAB Rule 10842WCAB Rule 10845WCAB Rule 10856Petition for ReconsiderationExhibits
References
Case No. ADJ6759028 ADJ9793036
Regular
Sep 09, 2015

JAVIER MOYA vs. SLEEP TRAIN, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Javier Moya's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. California law allows twenty-five days for filing, with extensions for weekends or holidays, but the petition was filed over four months after the WCJ's decision. Timeliness is a jurisdictional requirement, meaning the WCAB lacks authority to consider petitions filed outside this timeframe. Had the petition been timely, it would have been denied on the merits as per the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissaljurisdictionalWCAB Rule 10507WCAB Rule 10508WCAB Rule 10845WCAB Rule 10392proof of mailingproof of receipt
References
Case No. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. SBR 0271963; SBR 0247442; SBR 0247444; SBR 0247445; VNO 0299465; LAO 0761513; LAO 0761514; LAO 0761515; LAO 0761516; LAO 0761517; LAO 0761518; LAO 0761519; LAO 0761520; LAO 0761521; LAO 0761522; LAO 0761523; LAO 0761524; LAO 0761525; LAO 0761526; LAO 0761527; LAO 0761528; LAO 0761529; LAO 0761530
Regular
Dec 10, 2007

EDAR Y. ROGLER vs. LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT E. JOHNSON; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed an attorney's petition seeking to remove or disqualify Judge Kacey Joseph Keating from presiding over her cases. The WCAB found the petition for removal procedurally improper and the petition for automatic reassignment untimely, as prior hearings involving the judge had occurred. Furthermore, the WCAB denied the disqualification petition because the applicant failed to provide legally sufficient grounds or a required affidavit.

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for Automatic ReassignmentPetition for DisqualificationWCJLabor Code Section 5311WCAB Rule 10453WCAB Rule 10452Code of Civil Procedure Section 641Attorney Applicant
References
Case No. ADJ7192587
Regular
Jan 24, 2019

RICHARD SMITH vs. HENDERSON TRUCKING, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed petitions for disqualification or reconsideration filed by the applicant, Richard Smith. The Board found his numerous handwritten documents, filed over several dates, to be largely unintelligible and lacking specific factual allegations or references to the record required by statute and board rules. Therefore, the petitions failed to establish grounds for disqualification of the judge or valid reconsideration of the case.

WCABPetitions for DisqualificationPetitions for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5311Code of Civil Procedure section 641WCAB Rule 10452Mackie v. DyerLabor Code section 5902WCAB Rule 10842WCAB Rule 10846
References
Showing 1-10 of 7,717 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