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. SBR 0315782
Regular
Jul 30, 2007

GORDON ADAMS vs. SOUTHLAND DRYWALL COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a lien claimant, Premier Outpatient Surgery Center, Inc., whose lien was denied because it allegedly did not use its full corporate name or have a fictitious business name permit. The Appeals Board rescinded the denial and returned the case for further proceedings, finding that Premier was properly licensed as an outpatient facility and that the defendant did not timely raise the fictitious business name statement issue. The Board clarified that a facility fee lien claimant is not required to have a Medical Board fictitious-name permit, but may need to file a fictitious business name statement if operating under a name other than its legal corporate name.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantFictitious Business Name StatementFictitious-Name PermitBusiness & Professions Code Section 17910Business & Professions Code Section 2415(a)Medical Board of CaliforniaOutpatient SettingFacility FeeCompromise and Release
References
Case No. STK 0189570
Regular
Jul 30, 2007

JOSEPH BUENO vs. AMERICAN FIRE SYSTEMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision, allowing a lien claim of $10,838.43 for facility fees. The defendant argued the lien should be disallowed due to the lien claimant's alleged lack of a fictitious name permit. However, the Board found the lien claimant met its burden of proof by demonstrating proper licensure and that it was not operating under a fictitious name, thus not requiring a fictitious name permit from the Medical Board.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantFictitious name permitMedical Board of CaliforniaFacility feesArthroscopic surgeryStipulated awardPermanent disabilityFuture medical treatmentAmbulatory surgical centers
References
Case No. ADJ10430501
Regular
Aug 05, 2019

MARCO ESTRADA vs. INCA ONE CORP, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration. The claimant failed to prove it possessed a valid fictitious business name permit at the time services were rendered, a requirement for maintaining its lien. While the claimant argued they cured the defect, the Board found they did not meet their burden of proof and the FNP status remained canceled. The decision upholds that lien claimants must demonstrate compliance with applicable licensure and permit requirements.

Fictitious Business Name PermitBusiness and Professions Code Section 2415Burden of ProofLien ClaimantMedical Board of CaliforniaSecretary of StateFictitious Name PermitComplianceCurable DefectPetition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. SBR 0311485
Regular
Jun 28, 2006

KIMBERLY STOKES vs. PATTON STATE HOSPITAL / DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH / STATE OF CALIFORNIA, legally uninsured, administered by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the lien claim of Ambulatory Surgery Center of Pomona (ASCP) for services rendered to an injured worker. The prior decision disallowed the lien because ASCP lacked a fictitious-name permit from the Medical Board of California. ASCP argues a permit wasn't required for "facility fees" and it possessed necessary accreditations. The Appeals Board rescinded the decision, remanding for a determination of whether ASCP operated as a "clinic" requiring a permit or an "outpatient setting" exempt from such if accredited, and whether its accreditation was valid for ASCP.

Fictitious-name permitMedical BoardAmbulatory Surgery CenterClinicOutpatient settingAccreditationBusiness and Professions CodeHealth and Safety CodeLien claimantProfessional services
References
Case No. ANA 0356755
Regular
Aug 22, 2007

YAZMINA VERDUZCO vs. EXECUTIVE AIR WASH, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a lien claim by Outpatient Spine & Surgery Center (OSSC) for over $74,000 in surgical services. The original ruling disallowed the lien, finding OSSC failed to prove it had a fictitious name permit from the Medical Board. The Appeals Board rescinded this decision, remanding the case for further proceedings to determine OSSC's compliance with licensure and accreditation requirements and the reasonableness of its charges.

Fictitious Name PermitMedical BoardLien ClaimantOutpatient SettingAccreditationBusiness and Professions CodeLicensureBurden of ProofRescindReturn to Trial Level
References
Case No. RIV 0037205, RIV 0070473
Regular
Jul 24, 2007

LORRIE AVERETTE vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior ruling that Premier Outpatient Surgery Center was properly licensed and not required to have a fictitious name permit for services rendered. The defendant argued Premier lacked proper licensure and a fictitious name permit, but the Board found Premier met its burden of proof by submitting evidence of its licensure and accreditation. Premier was determined to be an "outpatient setting" rather than a "clinic," thus not requiring a fictitious name permit from the Medical Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantFictitious name permitMedical Board of CaliforniaOutpatient surgery servicesLicensureAccreditationAmbulatory surgical centersZenith Ins. Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Capi)Stokes v. Patton State Hospital
References
Case No. LAO 0878674
Regular
Mar 06, 2008

KARLA BUENO vs. PLAZA DEFENDANT LA RAZA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision that barred a lien claim due to the alleged lack of a fictitious business name permit. The WCAB found that while the lien claimant presented a surgical clinic license, the record was unclear about its actual business name and compliance with fictitious name filing requirements. The case is remanded for further proceedings to determine the lien claimant's true name and establish its compliance with fictitious business name laws.

Fictitious Business Name StatementSurgical Clinic LicenseHealth ServicesBusiness and Professions CodeMedical BoardLien ClaimantOutpatient SettingAdministrative Law JudgeReconsiderationReasonableness of Fees
References
Case No. RIV 0047694, RIV 0063415 RIV 0063416, RIV 0063417
Regular
Jul 19, 2007

DEADRA FRANKLIN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA / DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH / PATTON STATE HOSPITAL, legally uninsured, adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a lien claim by Premier Outpatient Surgery Center for unpaid services. The WCAB rescinded a previous order disallowing the lien due to Premier's lack of a fictitious-name permit, finding that the distinction between providing medical treatment versus an "outpatient setting" was not adequately addressed. The matter is returned to the trial level to determine if Premier, as an outpatient facility, was required to obtain a fictitious-name permit from the Medical Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPremier Outpatient Surgery Centerfictitious-name permitBusiness and Professions CodeMedical Boardlien claimantoutpatient facilitycliniclicensureaccreditation
References
Case No. ANA 0357324
Regular
Aug 20, 2007

ANDRES QUINONES vs. AN'S WORLD SERVICE INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted SCIF's petition for removal to reconsider a prior order regarding a lien claimant's (LC) right to payment. SCIF argued LC lacked standing because it failed to prove it held a required fictitious name permit from the Medical Board, while LC contended it was an "outpatient setting" exempt from such a permit. The Board rescinded the original order and returned the case for the WCJ to determine if LC is an "outpatient setting" or a "clinic" to assess its compliance with licensing and fictitious name requirements.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalLien ClaimantFictitious Name PermitMedical BoardOutpatient SettingClinicLicensureBusiness and Professions CodeStokes v. Patton State Hospital
References
Case No. ADJ2268134 (FRE 0196745)
Regular
Jun 29, 2009

Richard Garcia vs. KENNESON FARMS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision that denied payment to N&S Neurology Center for services rendered between February 10, 1999, and April 15, 2006, due to a lack of a fictitious-name permit. The Board found that the existing stipulations were insufficient to deny all lien claims, as some claims may not require a permit. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to distinguish between services that require a permit and those that do not, and to consider equitable factors. The WCAB affirmed its jurisdiction to determine lien compensability and the claimant's obligation to prove compliance with licensing requirements.

Fictitious Name PermitMedical BoardProfessional CorporationLien ClaimantsState Compensation Insurance FundMedical ServicesLicensed PhysicianUnprofessional ConductEquitable ConsiderationsForfeiture of Fees
References
Showing 1-10 of 256 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