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. ADJ13302605; ADJ15813943
Regular
Mar 07, 2023

MATTHEW WARE vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS FOOTBALL CLUB, LLC, GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY C/O BERKLEY ENTERTAINMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, reversing the WCJ's order to set the case for a Mandatory Settlement Conference on all issues. The Board found good cause to bifurcate and try the threshold issues of California subject matter and personal jurisdiction first. Bifurcating these jurisdictional issues is deemed more efficient, as a favorable ruling for the defendant would avoid further litigation. This decision prioritizes an expedited resolution of jurisdiction to facilitate the prompt delivery of potential benefits.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceBifurcationJurisdictionSubject Matter JurisdictionPersonal JurisdictionSpecial AppearanceDeclaration of ReadinessDiscoveryGood Cause
References
Case No. SAU8813471
Regular
Feb 07, 2023

KIMBERLY KENNEY vs. SEGUOYAH, INC., FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for removal of an order consolidating liens and imposing a temporary stay. The consolidation aims to resolve a common legal issue regarding whether the lien claimant is controlled by a criminally charged physician, which would trigger an automatic stay under Labor Code section 4615. The Board found no due process violation, as the order only stays other lien issues pending the common issue's adjudication. Furthermore, the consolidation serves judicial efficiency by avoiding duplicate rulings on this critical threshold matter.

WCABPetition for RemovalOrder of Consolidation and StayLien ClaimantLabor Code section 4615Due ProcessIssue PreclusionConsolidation OrderWCJFarmers Insurance Exchange
References
Case No. ADJ5774907
Regular
Jan 15, 2014

ROBERT PORTER vs. LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT WAREHOUSE, INC.; SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, overturning a prior order that dismissed the case from the trial calendar. The defendant seeks to litigate the statute of limitations as a threshold issue, arguing it was improperly denied. The Board found that statute of limitations is a threshold issue that can be bifurcated and that the prior denial of a dismissal petition was procedural, not on the merits. The case is returned to the trial level for proceedings on the statute of limitations.

Petition for RemovalStatute of LimitationsJurisdictionRes JudicataThreshold IssueLabor Code Section 5405Affirmative DefenseBifurcationDeclaration of ReadinessOff Calendar
References
Case No. ADJ7472592
Regular
Sep 21, 2011

AHMAD NAIEM vs. NORDSTROMS, INC.

In this workers' compensation case, the employer, Nordstrom, Inc., petitioned for removal after the WCJ took the case off calendar to develop medical evidence. Nordstrom argued the WCJ should have allowed bifurcation of issues, specifically addressing the post-termination defense to the applicant's injury claim. The Appeals Board granted the petition, finding good cause to bifurcate the issues of whether the claim is barred by Labor Code sections 3208.3(e) and 3600(a)(10). The Board also permitted both parties to withdraw from prior stipulations regarding notice and the "good faith personnel action" defense, returning the matter to the trial level.

Petition for RemovalOrder Taking Off CalendarMedical Evidence DevelopmentBifurcation of IssuesPost-Termination DefenseLabor Code Section 3208.3(e)Labor Code Section 3600(a)(10)Labor Code Section 3208.3(h)Stipulation WithdrawalGood Cause
References
Case No. ADJ8620013, ADJ10761228
Regular
Jun 08, 2017

MARK EBERWEIN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order. The WCAB further denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from denial. The WCJ's decision addressed an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue, not a substantive right or threshold issue. Therefore, neither reconsideration nor removal was deemed appropriate at this stage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory DecisionProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ10652805
Regular
Nov 16, 2018

JESUS ARELLANO vs. RJP FRAMING, INC.; REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration because it was taken from a non-final interlocutory order. The order at issue, which closed discovery, did not determine substantive rights, liabilities, or a threshold issue fundamental to the claim. Therefore, it was not a final order as required for reconsideration under Labor Code sections 5900(a), 5902, and 5903. The Board also found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if the petition were treated as a request for removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueRemoval
References
Case No. ADJ1528452 (LAO 0884582)
Regular
Mar 05, 2009

ARACELY LUGO, JOSE LUGO vs. A. RIVERA TRUCKING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a workers' compensation death claim for Jose Lugo, with Aracely Lugo as the applicant. The defendant, A. Rivera Trucking, Inc. and State Compensation Insurance Fund, sought removal from the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) after their request to delay a mandatory settlement conference for further discovery on dependency issues was denied. The defendant also objected to the bifurcation of the Serious and Willful Misconduct claim, arguing it would cause prejudice. The WCAB denied the petition for removal, adopting the WCJ's report which found the defendant had not demonstrated due diligence in pursuing discovery and had previously stipulated to bifurcating the Serious and Willful Misconduct claim.

Petition for RemovalDenying RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDependency IssueSerious and Willful Misconduct PetitionBifurcationDeath ClaimCrushed PelvisApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ9932360
Regular
Feb 25, 2018

MAXIMILIANO MORA CORZA vs. BELLA VINEYARD AG SERVICES, INC., STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant alleging industrial injuries to multiple body parts. The defendant, Bella Vineyard AG Services, Inc., sought to bifurcate the trial to address post-termination issues separately from all other issues. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal. The Board found the defendant failed to demonstrate the required significant prejudice or irreparable harm necessary for removal, and the potential costs of discovery do not constitute irreparable harm.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalIndustrial InjuryAOE/COEBifurcatePost-termination issueIrreparable harmDiscoveryQualified Medical EvaluatorJudicial discretion
References
Case No. ADJ6590798; ADJ6590824
Regular
May 08, 2012

ELEANOR CASTILLO vs. SENIOR HELPER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, SCO

The defendant sought to have the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) amend the Minutes of Hearing to include certain "stricken" issues. The WCAB denied this Petition for Removal. They agreed with the judge that the defendant's proposed issues, such as estoppel and contract law, are matters for the judge to consider when determining the enforceability of a lien settlement. The Board found no reason to bifurcate the issues, as evidence and testimony on all matters were already present.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMinutes of Hearinglien settlementenforceable agreementbifurcate issuesapplicant's injurycourse of employmentcosts and sanctions
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,949 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