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. 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 Consequently, the WCJ was disqualified, their May 12, 2025 Order was rescinded, and the case was returned for reassignment to a new WCJ.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. 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. ADJ15605011 ADJ16563992
Regular
Sep 02, 2025

ATEFA SAMADI vs. AMAZON

The applicant, Atefa Samadi, filed a Petition for Disqualification against the WCJ following an expedited hearing. The Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied the petition on the merits, citing Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641, which govern the grounds for disqualification. The WCAB found that the petition did not present sufficient facts to establish disqualification, and a judge's expressions of opinion or erroneous rulings in the discharge of official duties are not evidence of bias. The WCJ's report detailed past hearings where the applicant exhibited disruptive behavior and the WCJ's attempts to ensure due process while managing complex issues.

Petition for DisqualificationLabor Code section 5311Code of Civil Procedure section 641WCJ biasunqualified opinionenmitybiasWCAB Rule 10960affidavitdeclaration
References
14
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
Case No. ADJ10678864
Regular
Aug 08, 2025

ALEX CASTILLO MASIS vs. EAST BAY FOODS INC, EMPLOYERS ASSURANCE SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed a Petition for Disqualification filed against a Workers' Compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The petition alleged grounds for disqualification under Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641, citing an unqualified opinion or bias. Upon review of the record and the WCJ's report, the Board found the petition lacked sufficient factual allegations, declared under penalty of perjury, to establish disqualification. Although the WCJ suggested sanctions for false statements by applicant's attorney, the Board declined to impose them but admonished the attorney for not being candid and truthful. Therefore, the Petition for Disqualification was denied.

Petition for DisqualificationLabor Code Section 5311Code of Civil Procedure Section 641WCAB Rule 10960Judicial BiasPrejudgmentWCJ ReportSanctionsRule 10421False Declarations
References
8
Case No. ADJ7601705
Regular
May 23, 2011

DAVID CHRISTOPOULOS vs. BIG O TIRES, SEQUOIA INSURANCE COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the applicant, David Christopoulos, filed a petition seeking disqualification of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report. Finding no grounds for disqualification based on the provided record and the WCJ's reasoning, the Board issued an order denying the petition. Therefore, the WCJ remains on the case.

ChristopoulosBig O TiresSequoia InsuranceBroadspireCrawford CompanyADJ7601705Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJDenying Disqualification
References
0
Case No. ADJ7624426; ADJ8657421
Regular
Jun 18, 2013

NATHALIE AMEZQUITA vs. SCOTT ZIEHL an Individual, Co-Partner dba JEWELRY, Liquidation USA

The applicant petitioned for disqualification of WCJ Richard Shapiro, alleging enmity and prejudgment. The applicant's counsel stated the WCJ declared the applicant would "take nothing" and was "a liar" before trial. The WCJ did not deny these statements, suggesting they were to facilitate settlement and noting concerns about applicant's attorney's tactics. The Appeals Board granted the disqualification petition, finding the WCJ's statements demonstrated bias or the appearance of bias, and returned the case for reassignment to a new WCJ.

Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judgeenmityformed opinionprejudicedtake nothingliarinformal resolutionappearance of biasreassignment
References
0
Case No. ADJ18267667
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

ANA ORDAZ DE AMAYA vs. INTERSTATE MEAT CO., INC., COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Disqualification against WCJ Tammy Homen, upholding her report. The Board found the petition lacked specific factual allegations required by Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641. It emphasized that a WCJ's opinions or rulings, made in official duties and based on evidence, do not establish bias for disqualification. The WCJ's report indicated the petitioner's attorney, Albert Andrew Navarra, objected to an in-person appearance rather than demonstrating grounds for disqualification.

Petition for DisqualificationLabor Code section 5311Code of Civil Procedure section 641Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Rule 10960WCJbiasenmityunqualified opinionaffidavitdeclaration under penalty of perjury
References
11
Case No. ADJ9016568
Regular
Feb 23, 2016

JAVIER SOTO CONTRERAS, AMANDA ARANA vs. A.C. CUSTOM CATERING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, JAVIER SOTO CONTRERAS, ALLMERICA FINANCIAL BENEFIT INSURANCE, THE HANOVER INSURANCE GROUP

This case concerns a petition by SCIF (on behalf of A.C. Custom Catering) seeking removal and disqualification of both the applicant's attorney and the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The petition argued the applicant's attorney had a conflict of interest representing two claimants and that the WCJ was biased. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition regarding the attorney's disqualification as untimely. Regarding the WCJ, the Board denied disqualification because the petition lacked specific factual allegations of bias and was also untimely.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWCJSCIFA.C. Custom Cateringjoint representationconflict of interestwaiveruntimelyjudicial bias
References
3
Case No. ADJ18395672
Regular
Oct 13, 2025

FRANCISCO DE SANTIAGO CARRILLO vs. NEAL TRUCKING INC.; TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

Defendant sought removal from an order taking this matter off calendar and disqualification of a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) for alleged bias. The Appeals Board considered the petitions and the WCJ's Report. The Board denied the petition for removal, finding that defendant failed to establish irreparable harm or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. The petition for disqualification was also denied because defendant did not provide a supporting affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury, nor sufficient grounds for disqualification. The Board noted that the WCJ's actions, such as raising the issue of sanctions, appeared to be a reasonable response based on the case facts.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationWCJ DiscretionDeclaration of ReadinessIrreparable HarmReconsiderationJudicial BiasLabor Code Section 5311Code of Civil Procedure Section 641Affidavit/Declaration
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 6,290 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