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. ADJ6726149
Significant
Mar 22, 2018

Pedro Hernandez vs. Henkel Loctite Corporation, Zurich American Ins. Co., administrated by Zurich North America/Los Angeles

The Appeals Board held that a lien claimant's declaration filed on Monday, July 3, 2017, was timely because the statutory deadline of July 1, 2017 fell on a Saturday, extending the deadline to the next business day. The defendant's Petition for Reconsideration was therefore denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEN BANCPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantLabor Code Section 4903.05DeclarationTimely FilingEAMSDismissal NotationNext Business Day
References
21
Case No. ADJ4700514 (RDG 0104247) ADJ3038015 (RDG 0121741)
Regular
Nov 10, 2008

MICHELLE TOMEI vs. GENUINE PARTS, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed two days after the statutory deadline. The deadline for filing was September 8, 2008, but the petition was not received by the Board until September 10, 2008. The Board lacked jurisdiction to consider an untimely petition, even with consideration of CCP § 473.

CommutationPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor CodeCode of Civil ProcedureTimelinessJurisdictionalOrder of CommutationOpinion on Decision
References
4
Case No. ADJ9542380
Regular
Feb 14, 2020

Blance, Maria vs. ARMM, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Maria Blanco's petition for reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed, exceeding the 25-day statutory deadline. The WCAB clarified that filing means receipt by the Board, not just mailing. As the deadline is jurisdictional, the Board lacked authority to consider the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional LimitWCAB Rule 10507WCAB Rule 10508WCAB Rule 10845WCAB Rule 10392Service by MailProof of MailingAdministrative Law Judge
References
4
Case No. AHM 0079163
Regular
Aug 16, 2007

Ruth Torres vs. Bank of America, Cambridge Integrated Services

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed 43 days after the statutory deadline. The original order dismissing the lien was served by mail on April 19, 2007, making the reconsideration deadline May 14, 2007. Since the petition was received on June 26, 2007, it was untimely and therefore dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien claimantAdministrative Law JudgeNotice of Intention to Disallow LienUntimely PetitionStatutory PeriodLabor CodeBoard Rule
References
5
Case No. ADJ10213096 (MF), ADJ10230361
Regular
May 16, 2019

KALYANA GANDIKOTA vs. SK HYNIX MEMORY SOLUTIONS, ONEBEACON INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed, exceeding the 25-day statutory deadline. The Board emphasized that the filing deadline is jurisdictional and failure to meet it bars consideration of the petition. Even if timely, the Board indicated it would have denied the petition on its merits based on the WCJ's report.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for Reconsiderationuntimelydismissedfiling deadlineservice by mailLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsjurisdictionalWCJ report
References
4
Case No. ADJ7128820
Regular
Mar 26, 2018

Carlos Hernandez Moreno vs. Pavor Decor Masonry, Inc., Insurance Company of the West

This case involved a petition for reconsideration filed with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The Board dismissed the petition because it was filed late, ten days after the statutory deadline. California law dictates that a petition for reconsideration must be *received* by the Board within 25 days of service, not just mailed. As the petition was filed after this jurisdictional deadline, the Board lacked the authority to consider it.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimelyDismissalLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictionalWCJOrder Dismissing LienService by Mail
References
4
Case No. ADJ1816661 (SAC 0311832)
Regular
Jan 08, 2016

MICHAEL THOMAS vs. GEREMIA POOLS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration filed with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The Board dismissed the petition because it was untimely, exceeding the jurisdictional 25-day filing deadline after the Workers' Compensation Judge's decision. Proof of mailing was insufficient; the petition had to be received by the Board within the statutory period. The Board emphasized its lack of authority to consider petitions filed after the deadline.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportJurisdictional Time LimitService by MailDismissalLabor Code SectionsCalifornia Code of RegulationsProof of Mailing
References
4
Case No. ADJ9264491
Regular
Jul 15, 2016

FELIX MARTINEZ vs. KERRY, INC., YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by a lien claimant that was untimely. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition, as it was filed more than the statutory 25-day deadline after the original decision. The WCAB emphasized that filing deadlines are jurisdictional and failure to meet them deprives the board of authority. Additionally, the lien claimant had also requested withdrawal of the petition due to a resolved lien.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationuntimelyjurisdictionaldismissalLab. CodeCal. Code Regs.WCJlien claimantwithdrawal
References
4
Case No. ADJ3091366 (SBR 0341840)
Regular
Jul 24, 2015

AUGUSTUS PRESTRIDGE vs. NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYVANIA

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order dismisses Augustus Prestridge's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on May 28, 2015, which is more than the 30-day statutory deadline after the April 6, 2015 decision was served. The Board emphasizes that filing deadlines are jurisdictional and untimely petitions cannot be considered. The applicant was also advised to consult the Information and Assistance Officer for other procedural inquiries.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor CodeCal. Code Regs.jurisdictionalMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. Hagler
References
4
Case No. ADJ7154927
Regular
Oct 02, 2015

FELIPE AVALOS vs. FRITO LAY, INC.

In *Avalos v. Frito Lay*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed, exceeding the jurisdictional 25-day deadline for reconsideration after the WCJ's decision. Proof of mailing was insufficient; the petition had to be received by the WCAB within the statutory period. As the petition was filed significantly after the deadline, the WCAB lacked authority to consider it.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely filingWCJ decisionService by mailCalifornia addressTime extensionWeekend or holidayProof of mailingJurisdictional time limitAppeals Board authority
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 2,467 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