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. LAO 823855, LAO 823856
Regular
Oct 03, 2007

PEDRO M. RODRIGUEZ vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a denial of workers' compensation benefits, which was based on the finding that his claims were filed after notice of termination. The Board affirmed the denial, concluding that the applicant's job abandonment led to a termination prior to the filing of his claims. The Board also determined that the employer properly denied both the specific and cumulative trauma claims, thus negating a presumption of compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeApplicantDefendantRalphs Grocery CompanySecurity GuardIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ8941894 MF, ADJ8941878, ADJ9832104
Regular
Aug 06, 2018

SHANITA BUNDLEY vs. G2 SECURE STAFF, LLC, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal as reconsideration is the proper remedy for a final order. The Petition for Reconsideration was denied because it failed to specify grounds for review, cite the record with specificity, or fairly state all material evidence as required by statute and board rules. Consequently, the petition was deemed insufficient and unsupported.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportfinal ordersubstantive rightthreshold issueLabor Code § 5902Appeals Board Rulesskeletal petition
References
Case No. ADJ8162345, ADJ7959552
Regular
Oct 07, 2014

MARIA CHAVEZ MARTINEZ vs. RESTAURANT LEADERSHIP GROUP, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

Lien claimants' petitions challenging a WCJ's order denying their ex parte petition and ordering depositions were dismissed. The Board found the initial petition for reconsideration untimely, as it was filed 21 days after personal service, and the order was not a final one. The second petition for removal was denied as the lien claimants failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, and the WCJ's reasoning was sound.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalUntimely PetitionFinal OrderEx Parte PetitionWCJ OrderDiscovery BurdenJurisdictional Time Limit
References
Case No. ADJ1030732 (OXN 0137440) ADJ503798 (OXN 0137441) ADJ3788329 (OXN 0137713)
Regular
Jul 07, 2008

TERESITA C. DOMINGO vs. HONEYWELL, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, FINLAY FINE JEWELRY CO., CHUBB GROUP OF INSURANCE COMPANIES

This case involves applicant's counsel, Olive Richards, seeking attorney fees. The WCJ initially denied her petition for fees due to a lack of specific legal actions and a Bill of Particulars. While counsel has now filed a Bill of Particulars, the Board dismissed her Petition for Reconsideration as it was not taken from a final order. The Petition for Removal was also denied, as counsel failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, allowing the matter to return to the trial level for a ruling on fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAttorney FeesBill of ParticularsFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightWCJ Report and RecommendationApplicant Counsel
References
Case No. ADJ7255629, ADJ7258202
Regular
Apr 23, 2013

ROMALDA MERCADO vs. CM LAUNDRY, LLC, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES for CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a July 18, 2012 decision. The dismissal is based on the petitioner's withdrawal of the petition. Furthermore, the Board notes that the petition was likely untimely and defective, as indicated in the administrative law judge's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissing PetitionUntimely PetitionDefective PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge's ReportCase NumbersApplicantDefendantsWithdrawal of Petition
References
Case No. ADJ3399937 (VNO 0423516 ADJ8997142 ADJ10559387 ADJ7656828
Regular
Feb 27, 2019

DAVE ZADA vs. ALPRO MILLWORKING, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Dave Zada's petition for reconsideration. The WCAB found the petition untimely, successive, and skeletal, failing to meet procedural requirements for reconsideration. Zada also did not demonstrate how he was aggrieved by the prior WCAB decision. Therefore, the WCAB lacked jurisdiction to consider the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationPro PerSuccessive PetitionUntimely PetitionSkeletal PetitionAggrieved PartyJurisdictional Time LimitVerified PleadingsMaterial EvidenceProof of Service
References
Case No. ADJ9211017
Regular
Mar 28, 2017

JOSE MENDOZA vs. KINGSLEY COMPANIES; SAMSUNG FIRE AND MARINE c/o BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the denial of a credit for benefits paid. The WCAB found that the administrative law judge's decision not to grant the credit was within their discretion and not an abuse of discretion, considering the lack of wrongdoing by the applicant. The applicant's petition for reconsideration was dismissed as skeletal and unsupported by specific references to the record and legal principles, as required by statute and board rules. Therefore, the WCAB upheld the original denial of the credit and dismissed the applicant's petition.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDenying PetitionDismissing PetitionLabor Code section 4909CreditDiscretionary AuthorityEquitable PrinciplesSkeletal PetitionAppeals Board Rules
References
Case No. OAK 289476
Regular
Mar 20, 2008

DIANE KAISER vs. FREMONT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ALAMEDA COUNTY SCHOOLS INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior denial as untimely and impermissibly successive, noting that a writ of review to the Court of Appeal is the proper avenue for challenging final decisions. The Board also dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a venue change denial, finding it was not a final order subject to reconsideration, and denied removal, finding no demonstration of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Finally, the applicant was admonished to follow the Board's procedural rules for filing petitions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalIn Pro PerWCJ ReportVenueLabor Code Section 5501.5Interlocutory OrderFinal OrderPrejudice
References
Case No. ADJ8183477
Regular
Jan 14, 2016

DOLORES MOSELEY vs. NOIA RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, INC., ICW GROUP/INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Dolores Moseley's petition for reconsideration. The petition was untimely as it sought reconsideration of an award made over a year prior to filing. Furthermore, the petition was unverified and lacked specificity regarding the issues and legal arguments. Finally, the orders Moseley sought to reconsider were either vacated or deemed non-final procedural decisions, rendering the petition moot.

Labor Code Section 132aPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeOrder Dismissing PetitionOrder Vacating Trial DateStipulations with Request for AwardTimelinessJurisdictionalVerification
References
Showing 1-10 of 13,705 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