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. ADJ8093832
Regular
Sep 24, 2015

ARACELI CASILLAS DE VAZQUEZ vs. EL TAPATIO MARKET, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

Lien claimants Western Imaging Services and Tower Copy Service petitioned for reconsideration after their liens were denied by the WCJ. The WCJ had ruled they were unregistered professional photocopiers and not exempt from registration requirements. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the lien claimants were indeed independent contractors of applicant's attorney, a member of the State Bar. Therefore, they qualified for the exemption under Business and Professions Code section 22451(b). The case was remanded for a determination of the reasonableness of the claimed fees.

Professional photocopierBusiness and Professions Code Section 22450Business and Professions Code Section 22451Independent contractor exemptionMember of the State BarLien claimantsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for reconsiderationDecision after reconsiderationWCJ
References
0
Case No. ADJ6981750
Regular
Jan 13, 2017

GUMERSINDO DELEON vs. ESPARZA ENTERPRISES, INC.

This case concerns a lien claimant's failure to pay a $100.00 lien activation fee required by Labor Code section 4903.06 by the date of a lien conference. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is considering rescinding the order dismissing the lien, but only if the fee is paid within ten days of this notice. The WCAB's intention is based on a court order allowing lien activation fees to be paid between November 9, 2015, and December 31, 2015, and the lien claimant's assertion of computer problems. If payment is received, the lien claim will be returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Lien activation feeLabor Code Section 4903.06ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimWCJDWCAngelotti Chiropractic v. BakerPreliminary injunctionNinth CircuitVacating injunction
References
7
Case No. ADJ1035201
Regular
Oct 04, 2016

VICTOR DURAN vs. DONUT INN, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board is considering rescinding an order that dismissed Metro Med Shockwave's lien claim for failure to pay a $\$100$ lien activation fee. The WCJ dismissed the lien because the fee was not paid before the lien conference, citing prior precedent. However, the lien claimant argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay the fee based on a DWC Newsline article referencing a court order. The Board intends to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days, allowing further proceedings on the lien claim.

Labor Code section 4903.06Lien activation feeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMetro Med ShockwaveFigueroa v. B.C Doering Co.Angelotti Chiropractic v. BakerPreliminary injunctionDWC NewslineReconsiderationRescind order
References
2
Case No. ADJ7308922
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

ARTURO CARO vs. JAX MARKET 3, FIREMAN'S FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claim, finding that the lien claimant's representative misrepresented facts regarding payment of a lien activation fee. Despite the claimant's verified petition claiming payment was made and evidence presented, the Board's own search and the WCJ's report confirmed non-payment. Consequently, the Board issued a notice of intention to impose sanctions up to $2,500 against Qualified Billing & Collections and Diego Plasencia for bad-faith actions and false statements.

Lien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06WCJ Order Dismissing LienPetition for ReconsiderationVerified PetitionMisrepresentation of FactsBad Faith ActionsWCAB Rule 10561Labor Code Section 5813Sanctions
References
0
Case No. ADJ8546699
Regular
Apr 10, 2017

MARIA HERRERA vs. YONEKYU USA, INC., SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS DIAMOND BAR, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to lien claimants Preferred Scan and Tower Imaging, rescinding the dismissal of their liens. The WCAB found that the notices of representation filed by the lien claimants' representative at the lien trial, despite not being formal "change of representation" notices, were sufficient under WCAB Rule 10774.5(e)(2) because no prior representation notice was on file. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings before a different judge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationWCJDismissed LiensNotice of RepresentationWCAB Rule 10774.5Lien TrialRepresentative AppearanceRescinded Orders
References
0
Case No. ADJ8 156794
Regular
Jan 12, 2017

NURY PEREZ vs. BLUE RIVER DENIM, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is considering rescinding an order that dismissed a lien claim due to a failure to pay a $100 lien activation fee. The lien claimant, Premier Psychological Services (PPS), claims computer issues prevented timely payment. While the WCJ recommended denial of reconsideration, the WCAB may rescind the dismissal if PPS pays the activation fee within ten days of this notice. If paid, the lien claim will be returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Lien activation feeLabor Code section 4903.06WCABadministrative law judgereconsiderationrescissiondismissallien conferenceCompromise and Releaseindustrial injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ6786700
Regular
May 26, 2015

MICHELLE LOPEZ vs. SHERATON PARK HOTEL, VALLEY FORGE INSURANCE COMPANY

Lien claimants' petition for reconsideration was granted because the WCJ erred in disallowing their liens. The WCAB found that the lien claimants' Notices of Representation complied with WCAB Rule 10774.5, as they clearly identified the representatives and met the signing requirements. Because the lien claimants were denied an opportunity to be heard due to the WCJ's improper rejection of their representation, the WCAB rescinded the order and remanded the case for a new lien hearing.

WCAB Rule 10774.5Lien claimantsNotice of RepresentationWCJPetition for ReconsiderationDue ProcessOpportunity to be heardSubstitution of attorneyWCABAdministrative law judge
References
3
Case No. ADJ2742024 (SAC 0321214) ADJ3458925 (SAC 0321215)
Regular
Feb 01, 2013

Raymond Gastinell vs. Empire Pacific Windows Corporation, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

This case concerns a lien claimant's dismissal from a workers' compensation matter. The lien claimant failed to appear at a lien conference, leading to the dismissal of their claim based on defendant's representation that the lien was resolved. The lien claimant objected, stating they had not received a response to settlement attempts and had an outstanding balance. The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the dismissal, and returned the matter for further proceedings to address the conflicting representations and the claimant's failure to appear.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEmpire Pacific Windows CorporationLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyCompromise and Releaselien claimantTrinity Health and Wellness Centerlien triallien conferenceMinutes of HearingPetition for Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. ADJ8077330
Regular
Jan 26, 2018

LISA HENRY vs. ALLIED BARTON SECURITY SERVICES, Insured By ARCH COMPANY, Administered By ESIS CHATSWORTH

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of orders dismissing their liens due to alleged failure to file a Notice of Change of Representation. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the proof of service for the dismissal orders was insufficient, making the lien claimants' petition timely. Furthermore, the Board found that lien claimants complied with WCAB Rule 10774.5(e) by presenting their Notice of Representation at the lien trial. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the dismissal orders and returned the matter for further proceedings.

WCABLien ClaimantsNotice of Change of RepresentationWCAB Rule 10774.5(e)(2)Petition for ReconsiderationWCJEAMSOfficial Address RecordProof of Servicetimely filed
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stair v. Calhoun

Plaintiffs' counsel, Ballon Stoll Bader & Nadler, P.C., moved to withdraw from representing plaintiffs and sought a charging and retaining lien due to plaintiff Theodore Stair's substantial unpaid legal fees. Stair opposed the withdrawal, citing a pending settlement. The court granted counsel's motion to withdraw, finding Stair's prolonged failure to pay constituted deliberate disregard of his financial obligations. The court also granted a charging lien for $37,546.87, representing adjusted reasonable hours and expenses, but denied the motion for a retaining lien to prevent prejudice to the ongoing litigation and due to Stair's alleged indigence.

Withdrawal of CounselCharging LienRetaining LienUnpaid Legal FeesAttorney-Client RelationshipDeliberate DisregardQuantum MeruitShareholder DilutionMotion PracticeFee Dispute
References
86
Showing 1-10 of 4,874 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