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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 1983

Claim of Palumbo v. Transport Masters International, Inc.

The Workers' Compensation Board initially denied a claim due to late filing and lack of advance compensation payment. A subsequently located disability benefits file was reviewed by the Board in the interest of justice. However, the Board found no evidence within this file to indicate a claim for compensation was filed as required by section 28 of the Workers' Compensation Law. The court affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that only questions of fact were presented. The court concluded that the Board's factual findings were conclusive as they were supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Workers' Compensation BoardClaim Filing DeadlineDisability Benefits FileSubstantial EvidenceQuestions of FactAppellate ReviewTime LimitationAdvance PaymentSection 28Administrative Review
References
1
Case No. AHM 0125151
Regular
Jul 12, 2007

DANNY MEDINA vs. ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) vacated its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the applicant's petition. The dismissal was based on the applicant's petition for reconsideration being untimely, as the only filed petition was received by the WCAB on August 14, 2006, well after the deadline. Evidence, including proof of service and attorney declarations, confirmed that a timely objection to the original dismissal was not filed with the WCAB, divesting it of jurisdiction.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalLack of ProsecutionJurisdictionTimelinessProof of ServiceWCJAdministrative Law JudgeAshley Furniture Industries
References
1
Case No. ADJ3395089 (STK 0177203) ADJ2229380 (STK 0196966)
Regular
Apr 20, 2009

ROBERT MILLER vs. CAROL-CARTER DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board initially proposed sanctions against attorney Michael Linn, Esq., mistakenly listing the service date for his objection period. Despite Mr. Linn filing objections on March 4th and April 6th/9th, which were not technically untimely based on the actual service dates, the Board granted him further opportunities to respond. Ultimately, the Board extended the deadline to May 20, 2009, for Mr. Linn to file any additional objections to the proposed $\$ 500.00$ monetary sanction, citing potential service discrepancies and aiming to avoid any appearance of prejudice.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardmonetary sanctionsnotice of intentiondue processservice date discrepancyobjection to sanctionsadditional timeCalifornia Code of Regulationsfurlough directivesstate holidays
References
2
Case No. ADJ9270975
Regular
May 29, 2018

GABRIEL SANCHEZ vs. STRAW HAT PIZZA, AMTRUST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Gabriel Sanchez's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. The applicant had 25 days from service of the WCJ's order to file the petition, with the deadline extended to Monday, March 26, 2018, due to a weekend. Since the petition was filed on March 27, 2018, it was deemed late. The WCAB lacks jurisdiction to consider petitions filed after this jurisdictional deadline.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsService by MailDate of FilingOrder Allowing Cost
References
0
Case No. ADJ9128112
Regular
Dec 01, 2018

OSCAR GARCIA vs. NICK GONZALEZ FARM LABOR, STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case concerns a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendants. The Board dismissed the petition as untimely, as it was filed one day after the October 15, 2018 deadline. California law dictates that a petition for reconsideration must be *received* by the WCAB within the statutory period, not merely mailed. This filing deadline is jurisdictional, meaning the Board lacks authority to consider petitions filed outside this timeframe.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportSupplemental Findings of FactDismissalService by MailMailing ExtensionProof of Filing
References
4
Case No. ADJ8964113
Regular
Jun 24, 2016

LISA LIU vs. ADVENTURER HOTEL, TOWER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claim filed by Tri-County Medical Group for services provided to applicant Lisa Liu. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) dismissed the lien, finding it was filed untimely beyond the 18-month statutory limit. The lien claimant appealed, arguing the filing date of February 2, 2015, was within the period because the 18-month deadline of February 1, 2015, fell on a Sunday, extending the filing to the next business day. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the ALJ's order, and found the lien timely filed. The Board determined that per procedural rules, when the last day falls on a weekend, the deadline extends to the next business day.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 4903.5(b)Statute of Limitations18-month periodRules of Practice and ProcedureBusiness DayEAMS RecordJudicial Notice
References
1
Case No. ADJ9249111
Regular
Dec 01, 2016

JERMAINE HILL vs. COCA COLA COMPANY, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Psychological Assessment Services (PAS) regarding a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB dismissed the petition as untimely. California law requires petitions for reconsideration to be filed, meaning received by the board, within 25 days of service by mail, with electronic filing deadlines also strictly enforced. In this instance, PAS electronically filed its petition one day after the jurisdictional deadline, rendering it void.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalJurisdictional Time LimitService by MailElectronic FilingWCABWCJLabor Code SectionsCalifornia Code of Regulations
References
4
Case No. ADJ8235335 ADJ10301846
Regular
Dec 23, 2019

JACK KESSLER vs. E&J GALLO WINERY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by E&J Gallo Winery that was dismissed as untimely. The petition was filed on October 28, 2019, exceeding the 25-day jurisdictional deadline for filing after the WCJ's September 30, 2019 decision. The Appeals Board emphasized that filing proof of mailing within the deadline is insufficient; the petition must be received by the Board. Furthermore, the Board noted that the same issues raised had been previously addressed, warranting potential sanctions for frivolous conduct.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitMailing vs. FilingWCJ DecisionSanctionsFrivolous ConductReconsideration DenialAdministrative Law Judge
References
4
Case No. ADJ4706075 (AHM 0092392)
Regular
Jul 08, 2010

Carl Burd vs. The Boeing Co, American Insurance Guarantee

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of an order dismissing their liens, alleging they complied with court orders and timely objected to dismissal. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed their petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. The WCAB noted that the 25-day filing deadline, extended due to a Sunday, expired on May 10, 2010, while the petition was dated May 11, 2010, and filed May 12, 2010. As the filing deadline is jurisdictional, the untimely petition had to be dismissed.

Lien claimantsPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LiensWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJuntimely petitionjurisdictional time limitLabor CodeCal. Code Regs.Registry
References
2
Case No. Nos. 56 & 58
Regular Panel Decision
May 21, 2020

Matter of Seawright v. Board of Elections / Matter of Hawatmeh v. State Board of Elections

The New York Court of Appeals addressed two consolidated cases, *Matter of Seawright* and *Matter of Hawatmeh*, to resolve a departmental split regarding the interpretation of Election Law filing deadlines during the COVID-19 pandemic. In *Seawright*, the Appellate Division, First Department, had excused a candidate's belated filing of a cover sheet and certificate of acceptance due to COVID-19 related illness and quarantine, deeming it not a fatal defect. Conversely, in *Hawatmeh*, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found a candidate's late filing of a certificate of acceptance to be a fatal defect despite pandemic circumstances. The Court of Appeals reversed the *Seawright* decision and affirmed the *Hawatmeh* decision, holding that Election Law § 1-106 (2) mandates strict compliance with filing deadlines. The Court concluded that the failure to timely file constitutes a fatal defect that courts cannot excuse, even under unique or extenuating circumstances like the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing that it is the legislature's role to fashion exceptions to the law. Dissenting judges argued for a more flexible interpretation based on legislative intent behind pandemic-related laws and prior Election Law reforms, allowing for substantial compliance during the unprecedented health crisis.

Election LawCOVID-19 PandemicFiling DeadlinesFatal DefectStrict ComplianceBallot AccessJudicial DiscretionLegislative IntentAppellate Division ConflictQuarantine Requirements
References
39
Showing 1-10 of 8,509 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