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. 20867/18, 5648, 2024-07714
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2026

Palma v. Woodside Ventures, LLC

The defendant, Woodside Ventures, LLC, appealed the denial of its motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint. Woodside argued that the plaintiff, Javier Palma, was its special employee, thereby invoking the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law. Additionally, Woodside claimed to be the alter ego of Palma's employer, A&E Real Estate Management, LLC. The motion court and the Appellate Division rejected these arguments, finding that Woodside failed to establish prima facie evidence of special employment or alter ego status. Evidence regarding financial integration, commingling of assets, and control over A&E's daily operations was insufficient. The court also noted a conflict between an affidavit and the management agreement concerning employee responsibilities. Therefore, the order denying summary judgment was unanimously affirmed.

Special EmploymentAlter Ego DoctrineSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityEmployer LiabilityCorporate Veil PiercingAppellate DivisionManagement AgreementEmployment RelationshipControl Test
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Akin v. Anjon of Greenlawn, Inc.

Plaintiff Mehmet Akin sued Anjon of Greenlawn, Inc., Anton Parisi, and John Parisi, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York State Labor Law (NYLL) for unpaid overtime and retaliation. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that an undocumented alien is precluded from FLSA claims based on the Second Circuit's Palma decision. The court distinguished Palma, which concerned backpay for work not performed under the NLRA, from FLSA claims for compensation for work already completed. It aligned with other courts in concluding that immigration status does not bar undocumented aliens from seeking unpaid wages under the FLSA or NYLL. Consequently, the Defendants' motion for summary judgment was denied.

FLSANYLLUndocumented AlienUnpaid WagesOvertime PayRetaliationSummary JudgmentSecond CircuitNational Labor Relations ActImmigration Reform and Control Act
References
13
Case No. ADJ229693 (MON 0362437)
Regular
Mar 28, 2011

JUAN PALMA vs. NORMAN'S NURSERY WHOLESALE GROWERS

A lien claimant, former attorney for the applicant, filed a motion to disqualify the Workers' Compensation Judge, alleging bias. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) construed this motion as a petition for disqualification. The petition was denied because it was not properly verified under oath as required by WCAB Rule 10844. Furthermore, the petition lacked the necessary supporting affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury required by WCAB Rule 10452.

Petition for disqualificationWCAB Rule 10844Verified pleadingsAffidavitDeclaration under penalty of perjuryWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeBiasMotion to disqualifyLabor Code section 5311WCJ Blais
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 08, 2002

Claim of Palma v. New York City Department of Corrections

The claimant, a Vietnam veteran and former correction officer, sustained injuries in 1975 and was awarded workers' compensation benefits. His case was later reopened to address consequential posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and the Board attributed his PTSD to his Vietnam service, not his employment assault. Claimant's subsequent application for a rehearing and/or reopening of the claim, based on new psychiatric reports from 1999 and 2000, was denied by the Board on January 8, 2002. The Board concluded that the claimant failed to demonstrate the medical evidence was unavailable earlier or indicated a change in his psychiatric condition. This appeal challenged the Board's denial of the rehearing application, rather than the underlying PTSD claim. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding no arbitrary, capricious, or abusive discretion in the denial of the application.

Workers' CompensationAppealRehearingReopening ClaimPosttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)Correction OfficerVietnam VeteranMedical EvidenceAbuse of DiscretionArbitrary and Capricious
References
3
Case No. ADJ9734483, ADJ9502727
Regular
Oct 08, 2015

JUAN PALMA vs. CORNERSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an applicant whose case, ADJ9502727, was inadvertently dismissed due to a clerical error when he filed a dismissal petition for a duplicative case, ADJ9734483. Although the applicant's petition for reconsideration was untimely and therefore dismissed, the Appeals Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the erroneous dismissal order for ADJ9502727, finding it caused significant prejudice and was a correctable clerical mistake. The matter is now returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseADJ9502727ADJ9734483WCJremovalclerical erroruntimely petitionrescinded order
References
5
Case No. OAK 0305052
Regular
Dec 19, 2007

GUILLERMO PALMA vs. BEST EXPRESS FOODS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision that applied the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS), arguing the 1997 PDRS should apply. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, deferring the PDRS application and permanent disability determination pending the California Supreme Court's decision in a related case, *Vera v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.* The matter is returned to the trial level for a new decision after the *Vera* outcome.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent Disability Rating Schedule2005 PDRS1997 PDRSVera v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Labor Code Section 4660Treating Physician's ReportPermanent and StationarySupreme Court ReviewReconsideration Granted
References
1
Case No. ADJ11002880
Regular
Mar 10, 2020

ROGELIO SANCHEZ vs. LA PALMA FARMS, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision rescinded a prior award, finding insufficient evidence to support sanctions against former attorney Ozeran for missed conferences and improper filings. The Board reallocated attorney's fees, granting Ozeran $1,000 and current attorney Stone $2,750, based on the overall work and results obtained. Ozeran's earlier conduct related to conference attendance and procedural service issues was deemed to have reasonable justification, negating the basis for sanctions. The Board also admonished Ozeran for disrespectful language used in his filings.

WCABReconsiderationAttorney's FeesSanctionsPetition for RemovalProof of ServiceWCAB RulesQMECompromise and ReleaseLabor Code Section 4906(d)
References
7
Case No. ADJ10104251 ADJ10104255
Regular
Aug 01, 2017

MARCELINO PALMA vs. EVAN HUMPHREYS LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT, FIRST COMP dba MARKEL INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for removal by defendant Markel Insurance Company. The defendant sought removal due to the WCJ ordering two additional Qualified Medical Evaluation (QME) panels in ophthalmology and psychology, arguing it caused prejudice and cost. However, the Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, noting the defendant's counsel explicitly stated "No, your Honor" when asked for objections to the orders. The decision to develop the record via additional QMEs was within the WCJ's discretion.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardQualified Medical EvaluationOphthalmologyPsychologyWCJ discretionsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmLabor Code Section 3600(a)(10)specific injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ7781676
Regular
Nov 01, 2017

TERESA HERNANDEZ vs. T K & J, INC., dba LAS PALMAS RESTAURANT, PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claim by Comprehensive Outpatient Surgery Center for medical treatment provided to applicant Teresa Hernandez. The applicant sustained a complex injury in 2010, and the employer provided some treatment through Dr. Lane, an MPN physician, including surgeries. The lien claimant contended that proper MPN notice was not provided and that the applicant was therefore entitled to seek treatment outside the MPN. However, the Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding that the lien claimant failed to demonstrate that any lack of notice resulted in a denial of reasonable medical treatment, a burden of proof established by statute. Therefore, the employer was not liable for the applicant's self-procured treatment with non-MPN providers.

MPNLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderMedical Provider NetworkReasonably Necessary Medical TreatmentSelf-ProcureBurden of ProofLabor CodeSB 863
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Colon v. Major Perry Street Corp.

This opinion addresses whether undocumented workers are eligible to recover unpaid minimum wage and overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), particularly in light of the Second Circuit's Palma decision, which limited remedies for undocumented workers under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The court holds that undocumented workers remain eligible for FLSA recovery, distinguishing FLSA from NLRA based on their remedial schemes, statutory approaches to unlawful activity, and the nature of backpay (retrospective vs. post-termination). Consequently, the court approves a Notice of Pendency including language that permits undocumented workers to participate in the collective action regardless of immigration status and denies the defendants' motion for discovery into the immigration status of potential plaintiffs.

FLSANYLLUndocumented WorkersImmigration StatusMinimum WageOvertime WagesCollective ActionNotice of PendencyDiscovery MotionNLRA
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 12 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