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

Claim of Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement Co.

The court granted a motion to dismiss an appeal, finding the board's decision to deny applications to reopen three cases and restore two active cases to the referee calendar to be interlocutory and thus not appealable under Workers’ Compensation Law, § 23. The court also noted that the board's decision did not preclude the parties from litigating the effect of previous injuries on the claimant’s overall disability in the active cases. Furthermore, the decision appealed from can be reviewed later on an appeal from a final decision of the board.

appeal dismissalinterlocutory decisionworkers' compensation lawreopening casesreferee calendarappealabilityfinal decision reviewclaimant disabilityprocedural lawjudicial panel decision
References
0
Case No. ADJ7396875
Regular
Oct 31, 2013

THERESIA TITTERINGTON vs. O'REILLY AUTO PARTS, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration. This dismissal occurred because reconsideration can only be sought from a final order, decision, or award that determines substantive rights and liabilities. Interlocutory procedural orders, such as pre-trial rulings on evidence or discovery, are not considered final orders and thus are not subject to reconsideration. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as it addressed a non-final, procedural matter.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissal OrderInterlocutory OrdersFinal OrderSubstantive RightsLiabilitiesWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLab. Code§ 5900
References
5
Case No. ADJ10330567, ADJ10509711
Regular
Jul 17, 2017

FRANCISCO SALAZAR vs. NATURE'S BEST DISTRIBUTION, LLC, TRAVELERS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT & INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded its prior order granting reconsideration and dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration and removal. The WCAB found the judge's order rescinding a compromise and release agreement was an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision, and thus not subject to reconsideration. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings regarding the disputed settlement addendum. The defendant's argument that the rescinding order lacked substantial evidence was not addressed as the petition was dismissed on procedural grounds.

WCABReconsiderationOrder RescindingCompromise and ReleaseJoint Order ApprovingPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJSubstantial EvidenceFinal Order
References
6
Case No. ADJ10003985 ADJ10521694
Regular
Oct 29, 2019

MARIA ESTELA GONZALEZ vs. FAMILY RANCH, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) decision was not a final order. The WCAB granted Removal instead, finding that the WCJ's ruling addressed an interlocutory procedural or evidentiary issue. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutoryProcedural DecisionEvidentiary IssueWCJ DecisionWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
4
Case No. ADJ12189093, ADJ12954925
Regular
Apr 25, 2023

JOEL SANCHEZ vs. NORA LIGHTING, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted applicant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's February 9, 2023 order. This order had compelled parties to meet and confer on a joint letter to a QME regarding injury dates and medical record review. The Board found the WCJ's order was an interlocutory procedural decision, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. Applicant argued the order violated due process and prevented adjudication of his petition for a replacement QME. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a decision that creates a substantive record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorLabor Code section 4628Due ProcessAdjudication NumbersJoint LetterMedical RecordsDiscovery OrderInterlocutory Order
References
8
Case No. ADJ10939915
Regular
Jul 27, 2017

CYNTHIA MCDANIEL vs. TIMEC/BROADSPECTRUM, ESIS/INA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Cynthia McDaniel's petition for reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision on substantive rights or liabilities. However, the WCAB granted her petition for removal. The WCAB rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This action was based on the WCJ's own report, which the WCAB adopted and incorporated.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory ProceduralEvidentiary IssueRescinded DecisionFurther ProceedingsWCJ Report
References
4
Case No. ADJ1124701 (OAK 0304697)
Regular
Jan 25, 2010

GENE THOMAS vs. SLEEP TRAIN MATTRESS CENTER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a prior decision favoring the applicant's spinal surgery, finding that proper procedural steps were not followed. The employer's utilization review (UR) had denied the surgery, but neither party followed the required second-opinion process under Labor Code section 4062(b). The WCAB returned the case to the trial level, allowing the employer ten days from receipt of the decision to object to the surgery and initiate the second-opinion process. This decision aligns with the WCAB's en banc ruling in *Cervantes*, which clarified the procedures for handling spinal surgery disputes after UR denials.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardUtilization ReviewLabor Code section 4062(b)Spinal SurgerySecond OpinionCervantes v. El Aguila Food ProductsACOEM GuidelinesExperimental TreatmentEn Banc DecisionAdministrative Director Rules
References
4
Case No. ADJ6913723
Regular
Mar 01, 2010

ZACHARY GRAM vs. CITY OF WALNUT CREEK

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order changing venue was an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision on substantive rights or liabilities. The Board then granted removal on its own motion to clarify the record and resolve conflicting procedural orders regarding the venue change. Specifically, the Board vacated prior orders, including an order granting a venue change and a subsequent order rescinding it. The matter is returned to the trial level for a determination on the defendant's request for a venue change.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalReconsiderationVenueLabor Code Section 5310Interlocutory OrderProcedural OrderSubstantive RightIrreparable HarmRescind
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Bellantoni v. City of New York School Food and Nutrition Services

Claimant applied for workers' compensation benefits in 2011, alleging a work-related shoulder injury in 2009. The employer controverted the claim but failed to file a timely prehearing conference statement or demonstrate good cause for delay, leading the Workers' Compensation Board to rule that the employer waived its defenses. The employer appealed this interlocutory decision. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal, holding that an interlocutory decision that does not dispose of all substantive issues is not appealable, and the employer could appeal from the Board's final decision if necessary.

Workers' Compensation AppealInterlocutory DecisionWaiver of DefenseTimely Notice of InjuryPrehearing Conference StatementAppellate JurisdictionProcedural Dismissal
References
8
Case No. ADJ3847846 (SDO 0345131)
Regular
Apr 24, 2009

Michelle Camp vs. San Diego Rural Fire Protection District

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's decision regarding applicant Michelle Camp's temporary disability benefits and attorney's fees. The Board rescinded the original decision due to procedural errors, specifically the lack of a proper record including issues and stipulations, and the reliance on unverified letters as petitions. The case is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings, a corrected record, and a new decision. This action ensures all procedural requirements are met before a final determination is made.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardvolunteer firefightertemporary disability indemnityattorney's feepetition for reconsiderationproper recordissues and stipulationsMinutes of Hearing Summary of Evidenceunverified letterLab. Code
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 24,175 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