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. ADJ1035201
Regular
Oct 04, 2016

VICTOR DURAN vs. DONUT INN, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board is considering rescinding an order that dismissed Metro Med Shockwave's lien claim for failure to pay a $\$100$ lien activation fee. The WCJ dismissed the lien because the fee was not paid before the lien conference, citing prior precedent. However, the lien claimant argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay the fee based on a DWC Newsline article referencing a court order. The Board intends to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days, allowing further proceedings on the lien claim.

Labor Code section 4903.06Lien activation feeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMetro Med ShockwaveFigueroa v. B.C Doering Co.Angelotti Chiropractic v. BakerPreliminary injunctionDWC NewslineReconsiderationRescind order
References
2
Case No. ADJ7813636
Regular
Oct 28, 2013

RAMONA GARNICA vs. ESPARZA ENTERPRISES

Willow Medical Group sought reconsideration of a dismissed lien, alleging it had paid all required fees. However, the administrative law judge (WCJ) reported no order dismissing the lien on the date cited by Willow. Since reconsideration is only available for final orders and no such order exists in the record, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Willow's petition. The lien claimant's prior dismissal order had already been vacated by the WCJ.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissed lienOrder to DismissVacated orderCompromise and ReleaseWCJ ReportEAMS recordProcedural historySubstantive right
References
2
Case No. ADJ17569878
Regular
Apr 28, 2025

Marvin Pineda Contreras vs. Southwest Plastering, Inc.; Zenith Insurance Company

Lien Claimant Oracle Imaging Riverside sought reconsideration of an Order Dismissing Lien issued on December 23, 2024, by the WCJ, following its alleged failure to object to a notice of intention to dismiss. Oracle contended it had not received proper notice of the hearing date, attributing this to the Appeals Board not sending notifications to its P.O. Box. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as premature, returning the matter to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the Petition as one seeking to set aside the Order Dismissing Lien. The Board noted that any aggrieved party may seek reconsideration after the WCJ issues a subsequent decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantNotice of IntentionFailure to AttendProper NoticeBad AddressReport and RecommendationCompromise and Release AgreementOrder Approving Compromise and Release
References
0
Case No. ADJ8 156794
Regular
Jan 12, 2017

NURY PEREZ vs. BLUE RIVER DENIM, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is considering rescinding an order that dismissed a lien claim due to a failure to pay a $100 lien activation fee. The lien claimant, Premier Psychological Services (PPS), claims computer issues prevented timely payment. While the WCJ recommended denial of reconsideration, the WCAB may rescind the dismissal if PPS pays the activation fee within ten days of this notice. If paid, the lien claim will be returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Lien activation feeLabor Code section 4903.06WCABadministrative law judgereconsiderationrescissiondismissallien conferenceCompromise and Releaseindustrial injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ6677451
Regular
Dec 24, 2013

ANTONIO VALENZUELA vs. MCCALL'S NURSERIES, INC.; HORTICA INSURANCE & EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, finding the WCJ improperly vacated earlier orders dismissing lien claims. The WCJ lacked authority to act after an untimely lien claimant petition for reconsideration. Therefore, the Board rescinded the WCJ's order vacating the lien dismissals.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Vacating Lien DismissalsLien Activation FeeMandatory Settlement ConferenceDue ProcessUltra ViresWCAB Rule 10500(b)WCAB Rule 10859
References
4
Case No. ADJ4297322
Regular
Apr 26, 2013

ARTURO SALAS vs. BAY CITY CONTAINERS, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration after their lien was dismissed by the WCJ for failing to appear at a lien conference. The lien claimant argued they filed an objection and that dismissal for non-appearance was improper under Rule 10562. Although the petition was deemed timely filed as the claimant received the dismissal order late, the Appeals Board dismissed the petition due to procedural defects. Specifically, the petition was not properly served on adverse parties and lacked specific references to the record and applicable law as required by Board rules.

WCABlien claimantpetition for reconsiderationorder dismissing liennotice of intention to dismiss lienlien conferencefailure to appearobjectionserviceLabor Code section 5903
References
12
Case No. ADJ8008848; ADJ8012651
Regular
Feb 23, 2015

MARCELA QUIRINO vs. MARMALADE CAFÉ, Permissibly Self-Insured, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION Administered by AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Lien Claimants challenging a Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) notices of intent to sanction Dr. Rubanenko and dismiss lien claims. The Lien Claimants argued the WCJ lacked jurisdiction due to pending prior removal petitions, but the Appeals Board found the WCJ retained jurisdiction. Because the WCJ proceeded and issued orders addressing these issues, the current Petition for Removal was dismissed as moot, with further appeals or reconsideration being the proper avenue for challenging any final orders. The Board also denied the request to remove the WCJ as the showing of prejudice or bias was insufficient.

Removal PetitionLien ClaimantNotice of Intention to Dismiss LiensNotice of Intention to Award CostsSanctionsWCJ JurisdictionPetition for RemovalMPNMedical Provider NetworkPrejudice
References
1
Case No. ADJ4672208 (LAO 0803058) ADJ3659786 (LAO 0803059)
Regular
May 29, 2012

DEREK CAIN vs. USF LOGISTICS, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

This case involves a lien claimant, Psychological Assessment, seeking reconsideration of an order dismissing their lien. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it was untimely filed. The WCJ initially dismissed the lien after the claimant failed to appear at a lien trial and then at a subsequent show cause conference. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration was filed 29 days after the WCJ's order, exceeding the 20-day deadline plus a 5-day mail extension.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissal of LiensLien ClaimantWCJuntimely petitionLabor CodeService by MailJurisdictionSanctions
References
4
Case No. ADJ554893 (VNO 0541706)
Regular
May 21, 2015

GUADALUPE CUX vs. THE CHEESECAKE FACTORY, ZURICH, GALLAGHER BASSETT

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Liening Edge on behalf of lien claimant Frontline Medical Associates regarding a WCJ's order dismissing Frontline's lien and intending to issue sanctions. The Board dismissed the petition because Liening Edge is not a party to the case. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion to review the propriety of the WCJ's original March 5, 2015 order dismissing the lien and its basis. A decision after removal will be issued shortly.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionGranting RemovalBoard MotionLien ClaimantFindings OrderSanctionsAdministrative Law JudgeRepresentative of a Party
References
0
Case No. ADJ3875612 (LAO 0875949), ADJ4655048 (LAO 0875947), ADJ3780834 (LAO 0875984)
Regular
Aug 26, 2019

HUGO HERNANDEZ vs. FOX HILLS TOWING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a WCJ's statement that MedNet's lien claim was not dismissed. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition, finding that the WCJ's statement concerned an interlocutory procedural issue, not a final order. Reconsideration is only permissible from final orders that determine substantive rights or liabilities. No formal order of dismissal was ever issued for MedNet's lien.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJLien ClaimMedNetNotice of Intent to Issue SanctionsFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionDismissalRemoval
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 28,926 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