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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
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. SAL 0113718
Regular
Mar 21, 2008

MANUEL DeLANDA vs. SODEXHO, AIGRM

The applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation claim dismissed with prejudice due to repeated failures to appear at hearings and a medical evaluation. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the dismissal to be without prejudice. This decision acknowledges the applicant's lack of participation but prioritizes the public policy of disposing of cases on their merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationDismissal with PrejudiceDismissal without PrejudiceApplication for Adjudication of ClaimLaborerLeft Hand InjuryLeft Wrist InjuryLeft Upper Extremity InjurySequela
References
Case No. ADJ3865022 (LAO 837425) ADJ1234925 (LAO 837426) ADJ4652554 (LAO 889199) ADJ4467339 (LAO 889200)
Regular
Dec 08, 2008

MANUEL VILLARREAL vs. DELUXE LABORATORIES, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied Defendant's petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and dismissed their petition for reconsideration as it was not from a final order. The Board noted that Applicant's refiling of dismissed claims was procedurally irregular and that the WCJ incorrectly denied dismissal on procedural grounds without addressing the substantive issue of good cause for relief from dismissal. The case is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to consider Defendant's contention that Applicant must show good cause to set aside the earlier dismissal order and to potentially dismiss the later-filed applications.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWCJDismissal Without PrejudiceDuplicate ClaimsStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5405Applications for Adjudication of ClaimNotice of Intention to DismissGood Cause to Set Aside Dismissal
References
Case No. ADJ7485185, ADJ9885267
Regular
Sep 18, 2017

LAURA ORTIZ vs. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP, MID CENTURY INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies a petition for reconsideration, affirming the applicant's timely invocation of jurisdiction to seek additional benefits. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the applicant's filings of an Application for Adjudication of Claim and an Amended Application, along with documented medical evidence of worsening condition, satisfied the requirements for reopening and seeking further compensation. These actions put the defendants on notice of the applicant's intent to pursue increased benefits, even without a formal petition to reopen.

Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5410Application for Adjudication of ClaimRiel v. State of CaliforniaBeaida v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.stipulated awardpro perfuture medical treatmentincreased symptomsworsening condition
References
Case No. ADJ6627057
Regular
Oct 21, 2011

EDITH TUPAS vs. HEALTHCARE PARTNERS, LLC, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Edith Tupas's petition for removal seeking to disqualify the judge, have a judge attend her deposition, and prevent dismissal of her case. The Board found no sufficient grounds to disqualify the judge and noted the applicant's prior petition for a judge at her deposition was denied. Additionally, the Board found the removal request premature and lacked a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The applicant was reminded that failure to appear at her deposition could lead to a suspension of benefits.

Petition for RemovalWCJ DisqualificationDeposition SupervisionFailure to ProceedDiscovery OrderEx Parte CommunicationBias and PrejudiceSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary Remedy
References
Case No. ADJ9561124
Regular
Jan 05, 2018

MARIO GUTIERREZ vs. MOLYCORP MINERALS, ZURICH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the administrative law judge's order denying a new Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel was not a final order. Applicant sought a new panel after the current QME's deposition was rescheduled due to a personal emergency, arguing the QME failed to appear within 120 days. The Board found the specific circumstances of the delay were not a listed ground for a replacement QME panel under the regulations. Furthermore, the Board denied the applicant's request for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from the order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardQualified Medical EvaluatorPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and OrderdepositionMedical UnitAdministrative Law Judgeinternal medicineapplicant
References
Case No. ADJ7628650
Regular
Dec 18, 2015

JESUS CASTANON vs. INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY

This case concerns lien claimants' right to have their claims adjudicated after the underlying workers' compensation case was dismissed without prejudice. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) initially ruled it lacked jurisdiction to hear the liens, reasoning that the claimants did not seek reconsideration of the dismissal. However, on reconsideration, the WCAB found it retains jurisdiction over liens even after the main claim is dismissed without prejudice. The Board rescinded its prior order, finding jurisdiction, and returned the matter for further lien proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantsJurisdictionDismissal without prejudiceProcedural due processPetition for reconsiderationCase-in-chiefLien disputesApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ3777676 (SRO 0142207)
Regular
Oct 07, 2011

Louis Dukes vs. NORTHSHORE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's ruling on the admissibility of Dr. Kipperman's medical report was an interim evidentiary ruling, not a final order that disposes of substantive rights. The WCAB also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable injury that would justify this extraordinary remedy. Therefore, the applicant's attempt to challenge the exclusion of the report and the subsequent authorization for a new QME panel was unsuccessful.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluatorinadmissible medical reporttimely serviceinterim evidentiary rulingfinal ordersubstantive rightsextraordinary remedy
References
Case No. ADJ10559387 ADJ8997142
Regular
Dec 11, 2018

Dave Zada vs. ALPRO MILLWORKING, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, overturning a prior order that denied a Farsi interpreter for trial. The Board found that denying the interpreter would cause substantial prejudice and irreparable harm, violating due process principles, especially given the applicant's admitted speech difficulties from a stroke. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including the provision of a Farsi interpreter. This decision emphasizes the applicant's right to an interpreter for trial, regardless of past communication abilities.

Petition for RemovalFarsi interpreterAmericans with Disabilities Actconstitutional rightsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJApplicantsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmdue process
References
Showing 1-10 of 11,699 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