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. ADJ1723558
Regular
Jul 01, 2013

OMAR JACINTO vs. EXCEL DIRECT, FRYE CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration. The WCAB affirmed the dismissal of the lien claimant's claim because they failed to pay the required lien activation fee prior to the commencement of the lien conference as mandated by Labor Code §4903.06(a)(4) and the en banc decision in *Figueroa v. B.C. Doering Co*. The claimant's argument that they paid the fee during the conference was rejected, as proof of payment must be presented at the scheduled commencement time. The Appeals Board emphasized a bright-line rule regarding the timely payment of this fee.

Lien claimantLien activation fee (LAF)Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)Lien conferenceDismissal with prejudiceLabor Code §4903.06(a)(4)Figueroa v. B.C. Doering Co.Proof of paymentCommencement of lien conference
References
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. ADJ1197547
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

RAMON LARIOS vs. STAFFMARK INC. WEST, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION FOR ATLANTIC INSURANCE COMPANY in liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order dismissing N-Care's lien claim. N-Care failed to pay the required $100 lien activation fee before their lien conference, and a stipulation was entered acknowledging this failure. While N-Care paid the fee shortly after the order of dismissal was issued, the Board found this was not timely compliance with the regulation requiring payment prior to the lien conference or at its commencement. The Board adopted the judge's reasoning that payment "at" the hearing meant at the time the hearing commenced, not at some later point during the same day.

Lien activation feeDWC emergency regulation 10208(a)Labor Code section 4903(b)Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienDeclaration of Readiness to Proceedlien conferenceworkers' compensation administrative law judgeEAMS systemdisposition
References
Case No. ADJ2178733 (BAK 0154115)
Regular
May 27, 2014

LIDIA BUENO vs. RAVILA FARM LABOR SERVICES, REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claimant, Biocare RX Specialty Pharmacy, whose lien was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Biocare argued the dismissal was erroneous because it had not yet filed a lien. The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinding the dismissal order. The Board found it lacked jurisdiction to dismiss a lien that had not been filed and that Biocare was improperly dismissed for non-appearance at a lien conference for which it received no notice.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder to Dismiss LiensWCJBiocare RX Specialty PharmacyElite Lien Servicesjurisdictionfiled lienLabor Code section 4903.5industrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ7224294; ADJ6597177
Regular
Dec 31, 2012

GIOVANNI MENDOZA vs. COBY ELECTRONICS CORP., CHUBB INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Dr. Nachman Brautbar's petition for reconsideration regarding the disallowance of his lien. The Board affirmed the finding that Dr. Brautbar failed to meet his evidentiary burden to prove the reasonableness and necessity of his services, and that he was not the applicant's treating physician. The Board clarified that lien claimants, like defendants, must prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence, and reliance on outdated case law like *Keifer* is misplaced due to legislative amendments. Furthermore, Dr. Brautbar's failure to appear at conferences and present evidence on raised issues, coupled with procedural errors in his petition, supported the denial.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and OrdersWCJindustrial injurypsychelower extremityinternalherniacervical spine
References
Case No. ADJ7324743
Regular
Sep 13, 2013

DIANA GARCIA vs. USA STAFFING INC., INTERCARE

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claim. The lien claimant, Dr. Ashden, failed to pay the required lien activation fee before the commencement of the lien conference. The WCAB found this dismissal mandatory under statute and precedent, and ignorance of the law was not a valid excuse. Therefore, the lien was dismissed for failure to comply with the statutory fee requirement.

Lien activation feePetition for ReconsiderationFigueroa en bancCalifornia Code of Regulations title 8 section 10848Lien claimantOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 4903.06Lien conferenceCompromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ7189229
Regular
May 23, 2014

CLIQUN JIANG vs. NOGALES PHARMACY INC., STATE FARM INSURANCE

Lien claimants Khristine Eroshevich, M.D., and Ayako Nakano, D.C., petitioned for reconsideration after their liens were dismissed for failing to appear at a lien conference. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's report that found the lien claimants received notice and failed to establish excusable neglect. The Board emphasized that lien claimants are responsible for maintaining proper office procedures to track notices. The Board found no legal authority supporting a defendant's duty to contact absent lien claimants and noted the lien claimants' failure to object to the Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationDismissal of LiensLien ConferenceNotice of Intent to Dismiss LiensExcusable NeglectCivil Code of Procedure section 473(b)WCABAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ7892392
Regular
Apr 23, 2013

ANDRES MURGIA-ORTIZ vs. RED GATE FARMS, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns Encino Care Pharmacy's petition for reconsideration of the dismissal of its lien claim. The lien was dismissed with prejudice by the WCJ for failure to pay the lien activation fee and failure to appear at the lien conference, as required by Labor Code section 4903.06(a)(4). The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning. Therefore, the Board denied the petition for reconsideration, finding no legal basis for the lien claimant's objection.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJFigueroa v. B.C. Doering Co.lienEncino Care Pharmacylien activation feedismissal with prejudiceLC 4903.06 (a) (4)lien conference
References
Case No. ADJ6509620, ADJ6509621
Regular
Apr 25, 2013

MARIA ELENA MENDEZ vs. LE CHEF BAKERY, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE CO.

This case concerns the dismissal of a lien claim for failure to pay a lien activation fee under Labor Code section 4903.06. The Appeals Board held that the fee was not required before a lien trial in 2013 if the Declaration of Readiness to Proceed and lien conferences occurred in 2012. The statute's language distinguishes between lien conferences and lien trials, and the fee is not explicitly mandated prior to the latter. Therefore, the dismissal was rescinded, and the matter was returned for further proceedings.

Lien activation feeLabor Code section 4903.06Declaration of Readiness (DOR)Lien trialLien conferenceSenate Bill 863 (SB 863)WCJWCAB RulesPretrial conference statementMedical-legal lien claim
References
Case No. ADJ3205611
Regular
Oct 03, 2011

Pedro Valencia vs. TSL, LTD, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claimant, Ventura County Medical Transportation, seeking reconsideration of their lien's dismissal. The lien was dismissed with prejudice by the WCJ for failing to object to a Notice of Intention to Dismiss Lien. The lien claimant argued their representative was attending another hearing and claimed a response was mailed but not received. The Appeals Board denied the petition, finding the WCJ correctly followed regulations by dismissing the lien after the claimant failed to appear at the lien trial and subsequently failed to respond to the notice of dismissal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien claimantNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienGood cause objectionLien trialAdministrative law judgeCompromise and releaseAffidavit of lien resolution
References
Showing 1-10 of 4,728 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