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. ADJ7928242
Regular

TOYYA LASSERE vs. WARNER BROTHERS HOME ENTERTAINMENT, INC.

Defendant Warner Brothers Home Entertainment filed two Petitions for Removal regarding Toyya Lassere's workers' compensation claim. Subsequently, defendant filed a Notice of Settlement Agreement and requested the withdrawal of both petitions. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed both Petitions for Removal as requested by the defendant.

Petitions for RemovalWithdrawal of PetitionsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalSettlement AgreementRequest for WithdrawalPermissibly Self-InsuredVan Nuys District Office
References
Case No. ADJ12194488
Regular
Oct 27, 2020

John Babbitt vs. County of Los Angeles/Sheriff's Department

This case concerns a Petition for Removal filed by the defendant, the County of Los Angeles/Sheriff's Department. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition based on the September 2, 2020 Minutes of Hearing, which indicated the defendant intended to withdraw it. Even if the withdrawal had not been noted, the WCAB would have denied the petition after reviewing the record and the WCJ's report.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportMinutes of HearingDismissalWithdrawalApplicantDefendantCounty of Los AngelesSheriff's Department
References
Case No. ADJ8033649, ADJ8418002, ADJ2392693 (SAC 0321287)
Regular
Nov 06, 2014

Reid Rousseau vs. AGI Publishing, Inc. dba Valley Yellow Pages, Liberty Mutual, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) sought removal to the Appeals Board, challenging the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) denial of their request to participate as a party. However, the underlying case was subsequently settled, leading CIGA to file a Request to Withdraw its Petition for Removal. Despite electronic filing, CIGA failed to properly notify the Appeals Board of this withdrawal. Therefore, the Appeals Board dismissed CIGA's petition as it was withdrawn.

CIGAPetition for RemovalWCJDismissalWithdrawalEAMSElectronic FilingAppeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardParty Status
References
Case No. ADJ3507926 (MON 0335218)
Regular
Mar 04, 2013

Douglas Maida vs. GEP Entertainment Services, AIG Claim Services, Inc.

The applicant's attorney sought to withdraw from representation due to a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship, primarily stemming from the applicant's frustration over a credit issue. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the WCJ's order denying withdrawal was not a final order. However, the Board granted the petition for removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and allowed the attorney's withdrawal. The case is returned to the Presiding Judge to address the unresolved credit issue, potentially through a settlement conference with the applicant appearing in pro per.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJWithdrawal of AttorneyCumulative TraumaStipulations with Request for AwardPermanent DisabilityCreditThird Party Case
References
Case No. ADJ6877079
Regular
Mar 10, 2011

JUAN JOSE CUEVAS vs. ROOFING EXCELLENCE AND REMOVAL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant, Juan Jose Cuevas, initially sought reconsideration of an Order Denying Change of Venue. However, the applicant subsequently filed a "Withdrawal of Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration." Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition as withdrawn. This dismissal is based solely on the applicant's own action to withdraw their appeal.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawal of PetitionOrder Denying Change of VenueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalRoofing Excellence and RemovalState Compensation Insurance FundADJ6877079ApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ9212812
Regular
Jan 26, 2018

VERN MILLARD vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Vern Millard's Petition for Reconsideration because it was skeletal and lacked specific legal and factual grounds. Although the applicant's attorney attempted to withdraw the petition, the withdrawal request was unsigned. The WCAB cited Labor Code § 5902 and Appeals Board Rules 10842, 10846, and 10852, which require detailed grounds and specific record references. Without proper support, the petition was subject to dismissal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSkeletal PetitionDismissalLabor CodeAppeals Board RulesWCJ ReportVerificationProof of ServiceWithdrawal Request
References
Case No. SJO 0258370; SJO 0258371; SJO 0264287
Regular
Oct 22, 2007

SHERI COSBY vs. M. E. FOX & CO., ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS [AIMS]

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a denial to withdraw from a QME due to it not being a final order. However, the Board granted removal and rescinded the judge's order, allowing the applicant to withdraw from the QME due to the defendant's improper submission of non-medical information post-examination, violating Labor Code section 4062.3. While acknowledging the applicant's delay in raising the issue, the Board found no waiver or laches, ordering a new QME evaluation.

QME withdrawalLabor Code 4062.3improper communicationnon-medical informationpro per applicantattorney representationpetition for reconsiderationremoval motionAppeals Boardstatutory violation
References
Case No. ADJ8534090
Regular
Oct 10, 2025

EDDIE KENNISON III vs. DENVER BRONCOS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY

Defendant filed a petition for removal from an election made by the applicant at a hearing on December 18, 2023. Subsequently, on March 18, 2024, the parties filed a petition to withdraw the petition for removal as they had entered into a Compromise and Release, which was approved on the same day. As a result, the petition for removal is dismissed because the issue has become moot.

Petition for RemovalCompromise and ReleaseMootAdjudication NumbersWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardVan Nuys District OfficeDismissalApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ8377055
Regular
Dec 13, 2012

MARIA PEREZ vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, MARRIOTT CLAIMS SERVICES

This case involves a petition for removal filed by a party in **Maria Perez v. Marriott International; Marriott Claims Services**. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued an order dismissing this petition. The dismissal is due to the petitioner's withdrawal of their request for removal. Therefore, the Board has formally closed the matter regarding the petition for removal.

Petition for RemovalDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantMarriott InternationalMarriott Claims ServicesADJ8377055San Jose District OfficeDecision November 13 2012
References
Case No. ADJ7162315; ADJ7162454
Regular
May 07, 2015

vs. SUPER A FOODS, SPRINGFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, defense attorney Jacquelyn S. Sherlin filed a petition to disqualify Administrative Law Judge Tracy L. Hughes, alleging bias and a premature formation of opinion. However, Sherlin subsequently filed a Request to Withdraw this petition. Consequently, the Board dismissed the petition for disqualification.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJenmityunqualified opinionwithdrawaladministrative law judgeworkers' compensation appeals boarddefendantapplicantSan Bernardino District Office
References
Showing 1-10 of 230 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