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. ADJ6766189
Regular
Jul 03, 2012

MIRNA CERRATO AGUILAR vs. BEVERLY PAVILION ASSOCIATES, FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Anna Montes, a hearing representative, regarding a $1,500 sanction imposed by the WCJ. Montes was sanctioned for her "insolent, obstructive, disrespectful and frivolous" conduct during a workers' compensation trial involving her client, Dr. Anguizola. The Appeals Board denied Montes' petition, adopting the WCJ's report which detailed how her behavior caused unnecessary delay and wasted Board resources. The Board reiterated that representatives must conduct themselves professionally and ethically, adhering to rules against bad faith tactics that cause delay.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryRoom AttendantLien ClaimantMedical TreatmentPenaltyInterestInsolent Conduct
References
Case No. ADJ9719826
Regular
Aug 12, 2016

ABIGAIL FLORES vs. RISSE CONSTRUCTION CO., AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a $\$1000$ sanction order for bad-faith actions. The sanction was imposed due to the defendant's egregious delay and frivolous objections in paying a $\$180$ interpreter's lien, which took over eight months and required multiple billings and a court order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, upholding the WCJ's finding of frivolous conduct intended to cause unnecessary delay. The Board also affirmed that due process was satisfied by providing the defendant notice and an opportunity to respond to the sanctions.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsOrder Imposing SanctionsBad Faith ActionsFrivolous ConductWCJLien ClaimUnnecessary DelayCertified Interpreter
References
Case No. ADJ2572472 (STK 0211277)
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

Eugene Bogarin vs. CITY OF STOCKTON

The defendant sought reconsideration of a decision denying sanctions against the applicant's attorney for alleged bad faith. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that no sanctionable conduct occurred. While not finding the conduct warranting sanctions in this instance, the WCAB strongly admonished both the applicant's attorney and his clinic for filing a seemingly frivolous Petition to Reopen without client communication, which wasted resources. The WCAB cautioned that future similar conduct could be deemed sanctionable.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderAdministrative Law JudgeSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Appeals Board Rule 10561Attorney's FeesCostsPetition to Reopen
References
Case No. ADJ8802401
Regular
Sep 19, 2017

ROBERT MIKE CAPES vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

The applicant's attorney sought reconsideration of a prior order denying the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding sanctions and fees. The applicant's attorney argued the Board erred in upholding the finding that the defendant's attorney engaged in sanctionable conduct. The Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, affirming its previous order but clarifying that the sanctionable conduct was committed by Sammy Rabieh of the Law Office of Louis D. Seaman, not Mr. Seaman himself. The ultimate decision affirmed the original findings regarding sanctionable conduct and the award of attorney's fees and costs to the applicant's attorney.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsFees and CostsWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeSanctionable ConductAttorney's FeesLaw Offices of Louis D. SeamanSammy RabiehRichard W. Smith
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. ADJ10531138
Regular
Mar 10, 2025

JOAN MARASON vs. QUALITY COMP. INC.; ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

Lien claimant representative Alex Kauffman sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings and Order (F&O) which imposed monetary sanctions for disruptive and unprofessional conduct during a lien conference. Kauffman contended the F&O lacked adequate basis and did not reflect a review of the entire record. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the F&O, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. This decision was based on concerns that a reasonable person might doubt the WCJ's impartiality given the WCJ was a potential witness to the events leading to the sanctions.

ADJ10531138Alex KauffmanPetition for ReconsiderationMonetary SanctionsDisruptive ConductUnprofessional ConductLien ConferenceNotice of Intent to Impose SanctionsWCJ ImpartialityRescinded Order
References
Case No. Misc. No. 254
En Banc
Feb 14, 2013

vs. Daniel Escamilla

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board suspends Daniel Escamilla's privilege to appear before it as a non-attorney representative for 90 days, finding good cause due to a repeated pattern of sanctionable conduct, including frivolous filings and misrepresentations of fact.

Labor Code section 4907nonattorney hearing representativeprivilege to appearWCABgood causefrivolous conductsanctionsLabor Code section 5813WCAB Rule 10561willful misrepresentation
References
Case No. ADJ4230639
Regular
Nov 05, 2010

GARY FOSTER (Deceased), MANUEL VILLARREAL vs. RPI COATING, INC., SCIF INSURED FRESNO

This case involves the imposition of $\$ 250.00$ in sanctions against defendant's counsel, Sylvia Bedrossian, and her client, SCIF. The sanctions were issued for engaging in bad faith and/or frivolous conduct by failing to provide proper evidentiary citations and attaching documents not in evidence to a petition for reconsideration. The Appeals Board found this conduct wasted its limited resources. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionsLabor Code section 5813Board Rule 10561Bad Faith ConductFrivolous ConductImproper CitationsUnacknowledged ExhibitsPetition for Reconsideration
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,624 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