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. ADJ7337820
Regular
Apr 07, 2014

JOHN BOOTY vs. NEW YORK GIANTS, PMA GROUP, Arizona Cardinals, Fairmont Premier Insurance/Zenith Insurance Company

The applicant, a professional football player, claimed cumulative industrial injury against multiple NFL teams, including the New York Giants and the Arizona Cardinals. The applicant requested to dismiss the Arizona Cardinals with prejudice. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the dismissal to be "without prejudice." This preserves the New York Giants' potential right to seek contribution from the Cardinals should they be found liable for benefits. The Board affirmed the applicant's right to choose which defendants to litigate against.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Party DefendantsCumulative InjuryProfessional Football PlayerNational Football LeagueJurisdictionLiabilityDate of InjuryCompromise & Release Agreement
References
1
Case No. ADJ4519826 (AHM 0143791)
Regular
Oct 19, 2011

DEMAR MARTAY JENKINS vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, DALLAS COWBOYS, ARIZONA RATTLERS, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding California jurisdiction over the applicant's claim against the Arizona Rattlers. The Board found that the contract of hire was not made in California, as the applicant signed the agreement in Arizona and retained the ability to reject it. Therefore, California lacks jurisdiction over the claim against the Arizona Rattlers, and the applicant will take nothing from this defendant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardContract of HireJurisdictionArizona RattlersSCF ArizonaAvizent AnaheimWCJLabor Code Section 5305Labor Code Section 3600.5(a)Laeng v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
5
Case No. ADJ4115739 (VNO 0487593)
Regular

ZACH WALZ vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS; RISK ENTERPRISE 2314 BREA

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, concerning applicant Zach Walz against defendants Arizona Cardinals and Risk Enterprise, resulted in an order granting a petition for reconsideration. All future case-related communications are to be directed to the Commissioners' Office in San Francisco, pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration. The order was dated and filed on October 11, 2001.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationCommissioners' OfficeADJ4115739VNO 0487593VNO 0487351VNO 0487591VNO 0487592Arizona Cardinals
References
0
Case No. ADJ7233546
Regular
Apr 12, 2013

REGINALD SWINTON vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKLEY SPECIALTY UNDERWRITING MANAGERS, LLC, DALLAS COWBOYS, TRAVELERS, SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, PSI

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision affirms a prior administrative law judge's finding in the case of Reginald Swinton. The Board adopted the judge's report and recommendation without further elaboration. Therefore, the original May 31, 2012, Findings and Order remain in effect. The specific details of the claim against the Arizona Cardinals, Dallas Cowboys, and Seattle Seahawks were not detailed in this excerpt.

Reginald SwintonArizona CardinalsGreat Divide Insurance CompanyBerkley Specialty Underwriting ManagersDallas CowboysTravelersSeattle SeahawksPSIADJ7233546Anaheim District Office
References
0
Case No. ADJ8481999
Regular
Jan 21, 2020

Benjamin Claxton vs. Arizona Cardinals, Great Divide Insurance Company, administered by Berkley Specialty Underwriting Managers, Oakland Raiders, Ace American Insurance, administered by ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted reconsideration for Benjamin Claxton's case against the Arizona Cardinals and Oakland Raiders. This decision was made after an initial review of the record and is intended to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB aims to issue a just and reasoned decision after this thorough examination. Pending the decision after reconsideration, all related communications must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners, not with any district office or through EAMS.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardArizona CardinalsGreat Divide Insurance CompanyBerkley Specialty Underwriting ManagersOakland RaidersAce American InsuranceESISOpinion and OrderGranting Petition
References
1
Case No. ADJ7460656
En Banc
Jan 15, 2013

DENNIS MCKINLEY vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, declining to exercise jurisdiction over a cumulative injury claim due to a reasonable mandatory forum selection clause in the employment contract specifying Arizona as the forum, coupled with the applicant's limited connection to California.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDEN BANCCUMULATIVE INJURYPROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL PLAYERARIZONA CARDINALSTRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANYFORUM SELECTION CLAUSEMANDATORY FORUMLIMITED CONNECTIONEMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
References
61
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jeffrey BB. v. Cardinal McCloskey School & Home for Children

Plaintiffs, adoptive parents of three children, sued Cardinal McCloskey School and Home for Children for fraudulent misrepresentation and intentional concealment regarding one child's (Michelle BB.) prior sexual abuse, and sued clinical social worker Tina Privitera for negligence. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to both defendants, dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the court determined that the Supreme Court erred in dismissing the complaint against Cardinal McCloskey, finding that genuine questions of fact existed concerning concealment, materiality, causation, and scienter, and that the action was not time-barred. However, the appellate court affirmed the dismissal of punitive damages claims and all claims against Privitera, citing a lack of evidence. The order was therefore modified, reversing the dismissal of pecuniary damages claims against Cardinal McCloskey, and otherwise affirmed.

Fraudulent MisrepresentationIntentional ConcealmentChild Sexual AbuseAdoptive ParentsSocial Worker NegligenceSummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsPecuniary DamagesPunitive DamagesAppellate Review
References
10
Case No. CV-99-8182
Regular Panel Decision

Cardinal v. Long Island Power Authority

This opinion and order addresses multiple motions in two consolidated actions. Plaintiff Trevor Cardinal was injured after contacting an electric transmission line while discarding tree limbs. He sued Stanley Irwin, Jr., LIPA, LILCO, Keyspan entities, and the Town of North Hempstead for negligence. TIG Insurance Company, homeowner's insurer for Stanley and Jill Irwin, Jr., sought a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the Irwins. The court denied summary judgment for Stanley Irwin, Jr. but granted it for Keyspan Generation, Brooklyn Union Gas Company, Keyspan Energy Corporation, and the Town of North Hempstead, dismissing claims against these utility defendants. Furthermore, TIG's motion for summary judgment was granted, affirming no duty to defend or indemnify due to a 'business pursuits' exclusion. Cardinal's application for workers' compensation benefits was denied, both on statute of limitations grounds and because he was not considered a 'residence employee' under the policy.

Premises LiabilityHigh Voltage LinesElectrical AccidentSummary Judgment MotionDeclaratory Judgment ActionInsurance ExclusionBusiness Pursuits ClauseWorkers' Compensation LawStatute of LimitationsDuty of Care
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Medina v. Phillips

Plaintiff Philip Medina, an ambulance driver for Shiva Ambulette Service, was injured in a motor vehicle accident in 2007 and subsequently settled a personal injury action for $20,000. He had been receiving workers' compensation benefits from First Cardinal Corporation, LLC. The plaintiff sought a nunc pro tunc order to approve his settlement, which was initially denied by a lower court. This decision reversed the lower court's denial, finding that the plaintiff was not at fault for the delay in seeking approval, as the carrier had misled him. Additionally, the court determined that First Cardinal Corporation, LLC was not prejudiced by the delay, given that the benefits paid were below the statutory cap and the settlement amount was deemed fair and reasonable.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsMotor Vehicle Accident ClaimsSettlement ApprovalNunc Pro Tunc OrderInsurance LawWorkers' Compensation LawCarrier's LienFirst-Party BenefitsPrejudice ArgumentChiropractic Examination
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Sutter v. Albany Capitaland Enterprises, Inc.

Claimant, a bus driver, allegedly sustained a work-related injury in September 1996. The core issue on appeal was whether First Cardinal Corporation, administrator for Empire State Transportation Workers’ Compensation Trust, validly terminated the employer's workers' compensation insurance policy as of August 18, 1996. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Board concluded that First Cardinal failed to effect a valid termination, citing non-compliance with Workers’ Compensation Law § 50 (3-a) (3) regarding proper forms and notice period. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's amended decision, emphasizing that public policy requires strict compliance with statutory mandates for terminating insurance contracts under the Workers’ Compensation Law.

Workers' Compensation InsurancePolicy TerminationGroup Self-Insurance PlanStatutory ComplianceNotice RequirementsAppellate ReviewEmployer LiabilityWork-Related InjuryNew York LawWorkers' Compensation Board Decision
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 47 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