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. 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. ADJ332528 (AHM 0104042)
Regular
Mar 22, 2011

ERNEST DANIELS vs. PIEDMONT ENGINEERS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board imposed a $250.00 sanction against the State Compensation Insurance Fund and its attorney, Maria Frias Callejas. This sanction was issued due to their failure to respond to a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions and their violation of the Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure. No timely objection demonstrating good cause was filed. Consequently, they are jointly and severally liable for the payment of the sanction to the Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsState Compensation Insurance FundMaria Frias CallejasRules of Practice and ProcedureNotice of IntentionGood CauseTimely ResponseJoint and Several LiabilityAttorney for Defendant
References
Case No. ADJ8423237
Regular
Nov 09, 2016

RUBEN SALINAS vs. MAGALY CORPORATION, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming that the lien claimant received due process despite the absence of a formal Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions. The Board found that the lien claimant had multiple opportunities to respond to the defendant's detailed petitions for sanctions and costs, including a hearing and subsequent amended filings. Therefore, the lien claimant had adequate notice and the opportunity to be heard, satisfying due process requirements.

WCABPetition for Reconsideration DeniedLien ClaimantDue ProcessNotice and Opportunity to be HeardPetition for SanctionsLabor Code § 5813WCJ Report AdoptedSanctions IssueAmended Petition for Sanctions
References
Case No. ADJ3942275 (LAO 0879499) ADJ4411298 (LAO 0879500)
Regular
Jul 12, 2012

JESUS RODRIGO GUZMAN vs. CHAMPION ARROWHEAD BRASS PRODUCTS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves sanctions imposed against Erika Campos and Fred F. Hafezi, M.D., for bad faith actions and tactics. They are jointly and severally sanctioned $1,000.00 payable to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. Sanctionable conduct included a misdated proof of service and misstatements of fact in a petition, as detailed in the WCJ's report. Neither Campos nor Hafezi responded to the Board's notice of intent to sanction.

SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Opinion and Decision After RemovalMisstatements of factBad faith actionsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJProof of servicePetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to Issue Sanctions
References
Case No. ADJ809010 (LAO 0877737)
Regular
Feb 28, 2012

Jessica Leaser vs. Washington Mutual, Zurich North America, SRS/SEDGWICK Claims Management Services

The Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed three days after the statutory deadline. Although the administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a notice of intent to sanction the lien claimant for proceeding to trial without a legal basis, the Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the sanctions, finding the WCJ's assessment of "no factual or legal basis" unsupported on the current record, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionJurisdictional Time LimitsRemoval on Board MotionMonetary SanctionsNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsRescinded SanctionsLien ClaimantClaims Administrator
References
Case No. ADJ1773429 (MON 0282203) ADJ855226 (MON 0077581) ADJ2715287 (MON 0077582)
Regular
Oct 10, 2013

CURTIS WARD vs. TECHNICOLOR, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Curtis Ward's second petition for removal, finding his allegations of bias against the Workers' Compensation Judge mirrored a prior denied petition. However, the Board granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions against Ward's attorney. This action is due to the attorney's violation of rules prohibiting the attachment of over 300 pages of documents to the petition, which burdened board resources. The attorney faces a potential sanction of up to $1,000 unless she demonstrates good cause to the contrary.

Petition for RemovalWCJ BiasAppeals Board RulesRule 10842(c)Labor Code 5813SanctionsBad FaithFrivolous TacticsUnnecessary DelayBoard Motion
References
Case No. ADJ6446674
Regular
Oct 11, 2011

DAVID HERNANDEZ vs. RUSSELL FISHER PARTNERSHIPS, ICW GROUP/EXPLORER INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the original finding that he did not sustain an industrial injury. The Board also granted removal on its own motion and intends to sanction the applicant's counsel for submitting a petition with handwritten annotations to an already admitted document, violating procedural rules. This constitutes a violation of Rule 10842(c), warranting sanctions unless good cause is shown within 15 days.

Industrial injurySite managerPetition for reconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderCredibility assessmentWitness credibilityTake nothing orderSanctionsAppeals Board motionLabor Code § 5813
References
Case No. ADJ6711975
Regular
Aug 05, 2013

DIONICIO REYES vs. FILOMENA D'AMORE, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition to vacate an order dismissing their lien for failure to pay an activation fee. The petition was untimely, filed 59 days after the order was served. The Board also granted removal on its own motion to issue a notice of intention to impose sanctions due to the petition's untimeliness and multiple misrepresentations of fact. The Board is considering imposing a $500 sanction against the lien claimant's representative.

Lien ClaimantPetition to Vacate OrderLien Activation FeeLabor Code section 4903.06Untimely PetitionRemoval on Own MotionNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Misrepresented Material FactsWCAB Rule 10842(a)
References
Case No. ADJ1773429 (MON 0282203) ADJ855226 (MON 0077581) ADJ2715287 (MON 0077582)
Regular
Nov 19, 2013

CURTIS WARD vs. TECHNICOLOR, INC.

This case involves a sanction imposed against applicant's attorney, Leatrice L. Cohen, for violating Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Rules. The Board found Ms. Cohen's attachment of over 300 pages of documents to a petition for removal to be improper, as Board Rule 10842(c) prohibits attaching exhibits. Her defense that some documents were not scanned into EAMS was rejected, as the rule prohibits attaching documents already present in the record. Consequently, the Board ordered Ms. Cohen to pay a $900 sanction to the General Fund.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRemovalSanctionLabor Code section 5813Rules of Practice and ProcedurePetition for removalAppeals Board Rule 10842(c)ExhibitsEAMSFrivolous tactics
References
Case No. ADJ7199989, ADJ7118722
Regular
Feb 13, 2012

JUAN CERVANTES vs. WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER, HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) sanctioned applicant's attorney, Sunil Shaw, for $\$250.00$. This sanction was imposed for violating Appeals Board Rule 10842, related to proceedings before the Board. The WCAB granted removal on its own motion and issued a notice of intention to sanction, to which no objection was received. The sanction amount has been paid.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionLabor Code Section 5310Appeals Board Rule 10842Notice of Intention to SanctionApplicant's AttorneyShow Good CauseDecision After RemovalWestern Medical Center
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,143 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