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. ADJ9718375
Regular
Feb 04, 2015

JACK MOFFETT vs. THE WINDOW WIZARD, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY, APPLIED RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, rescinding the administrative law judge's (WCJ) order disapproving a compromise and release agreement. The WCJ had disapproved the settlement based on perceived inadequacy of medical evidence and lost wages, without first addressing the threshold issue of whether the applicant sustained a compensable injury. The Board found the WCJ erred by failing to follow policy and procedure, which requires notice of inadequacy and an opportunity for parties to respond, or scheduling an adequacy hearing, before disapproval. The case was returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the Board's opinion.

Petition for RemovalOrder Disapproving Compromise and ReleaseManual Section 1.91Adequacy HearingThreshold IssueInjury Arising Out Of and Occurring In The Course of EmploymentQualified Medical EvaluationSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWalk-through Settlement
References
3
Case No. VNO 0450531
Regular
Jun 12, 2008

NELSON PIMENTEL (Deceased) CLAUDIA CISNEROS, Guardian Ad Litem for SUMMER PIMENTEL vs. DAYNITE FACILITIES; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to address an attorney's fee dispute and a request for disqualification of the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The WCAB increased the attorney's fee awarded to Ronald Ehrman to $4,800.00, finding that he had cured prior notification defects regarding his adverse interest in seeking additional fees. Additionally, the WCAB disqualified the original WCJ, finding that his criticisms of Ehrman's conduct created an appearance of bias, and reassigned the case to a new WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeath BenefitsAttorney's FeesGuardian Ad LitemReconsiderationDisqualificationWCJAdverse InterestEthics ViolationsPenalties
References
3
Case No. ADJ3107843 (MON 0208626)
Regular
Oct 05, 2009

CHRIS DERBOGHOSSIAN vs. ALL TUNE & LUBE, ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY, CRAWFORD & COMPANY

The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision except for the attorney's fees award for the applicant's wife deposition; the contempt order was rescinded as the WCJ lacked authority to address indirect contempt.

WCABremovalreconsiderationdisqualificationcontemptindirect contemptLabor Code section 5814transportation expenseattorney feesmedical treatment
References
11
Case No. ADJ7184070
Regular
Aug 17, 2016

ARMANDO RODRIGUEZ vs. PACIFIC EXTERIORS, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's Petition for Removal and Disqualification of the WCJ. The lien claimant sought to challenge an order rescinding an earlier lien allowance and a notice of intent to sanction them for allegedly obtaining a settlement without proper authority. The Board found that the lien claimant had adequate recourse through a petition for reconsideration regarding sanctions and that the disqualification allegations were not supported by the record. The WCJ acted appropriately by rescinding the order when concerns were raised, and no bias was demonstrated.

Petition for RemovalWCJLien ClaimantSanctionsDisqualificationCompromise and ReleaseLabor CodeAdministrative Law JudgeOrder Re: LienPetition for Reconsideration
References
1
Case No. ADJ2241828
Regular
Dec 05, 2008

LISA MANZO vs. WHITE MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the employer's petition for reconsideration as it was not a final order but granted removal to rescind the WCJ's disapproval of the Stipulations. The Board found the Stipulations might be adequate despite the WCJ's concerns and ordered the matter returned to the trial level with missing documents to be filed. The employer must provide Dr. Knight's December 2006 report, its investigator's report, and the proposed Stipulations for a new decision on their adequacy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalStipulations with Request for AwardWCJ disapprovalinadequate Stipulationsunsigned Stipulationsindustrial injuryright wristright elbow
References
5
Case No. ADJ7624582 ADJ7986951
Regular
Oct 31, 2011

STEVE HERRERA vs. AMERICAN RED CROSS, Permissibly Self Insured, Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The defendant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's disapproval of a Compromise and Release (C&R) based on an improper waiver of Civil Code section 1542 rights. Subsequently, the parties withdrew the original C&R and entered into a new one without the problematic language. Due to this modification, the defendant withdrew its petition, rendering the matter moot. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition as moot and returned the case to the WCJ for review of the new C&R.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseCivil Code Section 1542WCJLabor Code Section 5005MootSedgwick Claims Management ServicesPermissibly Self Insured
References
1
Case No. ADJ3656063 (SRO 0135622)
Regular
May 03, 2012

HARVEY JOHNSON vs. ASIEN'S APPLIANCE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Applicant sought removal of an order suspending action on a Compromise and Release (C&R) that was mistakenly filed. The Applicant argued the WCJ erred, as both parties agreed the C&R should be stricken to allow for voluntary arbitration, but the WCJ's pending order blocked this. The Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, finding no significant prejudice or irreparable harm as no action was taken on the C&R. The Board clarified that upon remand, parties can jointly withdraw the C&R or seek disapproval, then request arbitration.

Petition for RemovalOrder Suspending ActionCompromise and ReleaseVoluntary ArbitrationStriken from the recordSignificant prejudiceIrreparable harmJoint requestTrial levelStipulate to withdraw
References
0
Case No. ADJ17371801; ADJ18218517
Regular
Oct 10, 2025

MARIO PALACIOS vs. PLAN B ADVANTAGE, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Applicant Mario Palacios petitioned for removal from a WCJ's order mandating in-person appearances for himself and two witnesses to verify signatures on a Compromise and Release (C&R). He also sought clarification on electronic signatures and challenged a prior C&R disapproval. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for removal, rescinding the August 4, 2025 order and allowing Palacios to appear remotely to verify his signature. The Board declined to issue an advisory opinion on electronic signatures but referenced relevant codes, and deemed the challenge to the prior C&R disapproval moot due to an amended C&R.

Petition for RemovalCompromise and ReleaseElectronic SignaturesIn-Person HearingRemote AppearanceDue ProcessWCJ OrderRescind OrderGood CauseWitness Testimony
References
6
Case No. ADJ12674446
Regular
Jul 25, 2025

MICHAEL KREZA, SHANNA KREZA vs. CITY OF COSTA MESA FIRE DEPARTMENT, ADMINSURE

Applicant Shanna Kreza, guardian ad Litem for deceased Michael Kreza, sought reconsideration or, alternatively, removal and disqualification of a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) after the WCJ issued an Order Suspending Action. The WCJ's order questioned the requested attorney's fees as excessive, which the applicant argued created an appearance of bias. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration, deeming the WCJ's order interlocutory. However, the Board granted the petitions for removal and disqualification, finding an appearance of bias by the WCJ due to unqualified opinions on attorney's fees. Consequently, the WCJ was disqualified, their May 12, 2025 Order was rescinded, and the case was returned for reassignment to a new WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFirefighterDeath ClaimAttorney FeesExcessive FeesPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWCJ BiasOrder Suspending Action
References
10
Case No. ADJ15136580
Regular
May 09, 2025

Neal Newton vs. Rudgear Logistics, LLC.; Falls Lake Fire & Casualty

Applicant Neal Newton filed a petition to disqualify the trial Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ), alleging bias and the expression of unqualified opinions during hearings. The applicant contended the WCJ belittled his personal physician, questioned his intelligence, and demonstrated bias against his video evidence. Despite the WCJ denying actual bias, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found an 'appearance of bias' sufficient to warrant disqualification, particularly noting the WCJ's characterization of applicant's documents without full review. Consequently, the Board granted the petition, disqualified the assigned WCJ, and ordered the case reassigned to a new WCJ.

Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAppearance of BiasMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedQualified Medical EvaluatorEvidence DisputeMed-Legal EvaluationCode of Civil Procedure
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 6,024 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