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. 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. ADJ2635006 (STK 0206833)
Regular
Nov 01, 2010

SAMUEL B. JOHNSON, III vs. CHEVRON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order denying discovery requests was not a final order. The Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm justifying this extraordinary remedy. The Board affirmed the WCJ's discovery ruling as reasonable and returned the matter to the trial level. The applicant may seek reconsideration of a final order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJdiscovery requestsRequest for AdmissionsRequest for Authenticationfinal ordersubstantial prejudiceirreparable harm
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. 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
Case No. ADJ1871643 (SDO 0291759)
Regular
Oct 23, 2017

JOSE GOMEZ vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION PAROLE & COMMUNITY SERVICES, Legally Uninsured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's award of medical treatment. The defendant's Utilization Review denial was deemed untimely because their Request for Information was served more than five business days after the initial request, excluding the day after Thanksgiving. The Board clarified that the day after Thanksgiving is considered a normal business day for UR purposes under Labor Code section 4600.4. Therefore, the defendant's untimely RFI did not extend the UR deadline, and the requested medical treatment was properly authorized.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardUtilization ReviewRequest for AuthorizationRequest for InformationTimelinessBusiness DayLabor Code Section 4600.4Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPrimary Treating Physician
References
Case No. ADJ7199986 ADJ7399845
Regular
Oct 03, 2011

ELMIRA SMITH vs. PACIFIC AUTISM CENTER FOR EDUCATION, TRI- STAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The applicant sought removal to challenge a finding that defendant's requested Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel was properly assigned. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the finding, and determined that *neither* panel was properly assigned. Both panel requests were found to be premature as they were made before the statutory 10-day period for agreeing on an Agreed Medical Evaluator had expired, plus an additional five days for mail service. This decision clarifies the timing requirements for QME panel requests following an unsuccessful attempt to select an AME.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Labor Code section 4062.2(b)WCAB Rule 10507Messele v. Pitco FoodsInc.Premature RequestPanel AssignmentMedical Unit
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. ADJ7047387
Regular
Dec 17, 2012

CECILIA ALAS vs. G & G APPAREL aka B FRIEND, INC., ACE PROPERTY & CASUALTY Administered By ESIS

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by a defendant in a workers' compensation matter. The petitioner subsequently withdrew their petition. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board is dismissing the petition due to its withdrawal. The Board also admonishes the e-filing petitioner for failing to notify the Reconsideration Unit via email of the withdrawal, which led to wasted Board resources.

ADJ7047387Petition for Reconsiderationwithdrawndismissede-filerControl UnitReconsideration UnitEAMS Reference GuideElectronic FilingDWC website
References
Case No. ADJ6701493
Regular
Nov 04, 2011

ESTELLA HERRERA vs. DMS FACILITY SERVICES, ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

Lien claimant Lopez and Associates petitioned for reconsideration after their lien was disallowed. Subsequently, the lien claimant reached a settlement agreement with the defendant regarding their lien. Due to this agreement, the lien claimant requested withdrawal of their Petition for Reconsideration. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as requested.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationDisallow Lien ClaimArbitrator's OrderSettlement AgreementWithdrawal of PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalNotice of IntentionObjection to Notice
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,924 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