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. ADJ759891
Regular
Jan 13, 2011

ANNIE WELLS vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Annie Wells. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the report from the workers' compensation administrative law judge. For the reasons stated in the judge's report, which the Board adopted, the petition was denied. The Board issued an order denying the Petition for Removal.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportdenial of removalADJ759891LAO 0837362Annie WellsLos Angeles CountyState Compensation Insurance Fundadministrative law judge
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Wells Fargo Armored Service Corp. & Office & Professional Employees International Union, Local No. 153

This case concerns an appeal by Office and Professional Employees International Union, Local No. 153, against Wells Fargo, seeking to compel arbitration after Wells Fargo discharged an employee. The dispute arose when Wells Fargo refused arbitration, citing the union's alleged non-compliance with preliminary grievance steps, which Special Term deemed a condition precedent to arbitration. The appellate court reversed this decision. It clarified that in labor-management agreements, unlike commercial arbitrations, compliance with grievance procedures constitutes procedural arbitrability, a matter for the arbitrator, not the court, to decide. Citing Federal law and the specific language of the collective bargaining agreement, the court denied Wells Fargo's request for a permanent stay and granted the union's motion to compel arbitration.

ArbitrationLabor DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementProcedural ArbitrabilityConditions PrecedentFederal LawGrievance ProcedureStay of ArbitrationCompel ArbitrationUnion
References
7
Case No. 15-10243; 15-12329
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 08, 2019

Corporate Res. Servs., Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re TS Emp't, Inc.)

James S. Feltman, the Chapter 11 Trustee for TS Employment, Inc. (TSE) and Corporate Resource Services, Inc. (CRS) Debtors, initiated an adversary proceeding against Wells Fargo, N.A. and Wells Fargo Financial Leasing, Inc. The Trustee sought to recover various transfers made to Wells Fargo, including $4.1 million in fees, a $2.5 million payroll overdraft, post-petition bank charges totaling $439,710.58, and a $240,220.26 WFFL copier lease payment, based on theories of constructive fraudulent transfer and preference. The Court found in favor of the Trustee for the $4.1 million in fees and the $439,710.58 in post-petition bank charges, deeming them excessive, punitive, or in violation of the automatic stay. However, the Trustee's claims regarding the $2.5 million payroll overdraft and the WFFL copier lease payment were denied. The Court also ordered an accounting for reimbursed legal fees to determine the recoverable portion.

BankruptcyFraudulent TransferPreferenceAutomatic StayDebtor and Creditor LawChapter 11Receivables FinancingCash ManagementIndemnificationLegal Fees
References
46
Case No. 571045/15
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 18, 2016

Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. v. Hereford Ins. Co.

Plaintiff Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. appealed an order from the Civil Court of the City of New York which granted summary judgment to defendant Hereford Ins. Co. The defendant had successfully argued that it timely denied no-fault claims because the fees charged for acupuncture services exceeded the worker's compensation fee schedule. Furthermore, any remaining claims had been paid by the defendant through a settlement agreement. The plaintiff failed to present a triable issue regarding the efficacy of the defendant's mailing of denials or the calculation of the fees. Consequently, the Appellate Term, First Department, affirmed the lower court's decision, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint.

No-fault insuranceAcupuncture billingFee schedule disputeSummary judgment appealAppellate Term decisionTimely claims denialWorker's compensation fee scheduleSettlement agreementProof of mailingFirst Department
References
4
Case No. 570383/18
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 12, 2018

Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. v. Global Liberty Ins. Co. of N.Y.

The case involves an appeal by Global Liberty Insurance Company of New York from an order of the Civil Court denying its motion for summary judgment against Urban Well Acupuncture, P.C. a/a/o Manuel Guaman. The Appellate Term, First Department, reversed the lower court's decision, granting the defendant's motion and dismissing the complaint. The plaintiff failed to counter the insurer's prima facie showing of lack of medical necessity and that the amounts claimed exceeded the workers' compensation fee schedule. However, the dismissal did not apply to claims seeking $439.25, as the defendant had agreed to this amount after correcting alleged coding errors in the plaintiff's bills.

Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewMedical NecessityWorkers' Compensation Fee ScheduleInsurance LawChiropractic IMENo-Fault InsuranceProfessional CorporationCivil CourtAppellate Term
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wells v. Colvin

The plaintiff, Sherry A. Wells, sought judicial review of the Social Security Commissioner's decision to deny her application for disability insurance benefits. U.S. District Judge Elizabeth A. Wolford reviewed the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision and the parties' opposing motions for judgment on the pleadings. The Court found that the Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with the applicable legal standards. Specifically, the ALJ's findings regarding Wells' severe impairments (diabetes mellitus, fibromyalgia, adjustment disorder), residual functional capacity (sedentary work), and ability to perform past relevant work were upheld. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, Wells' motion was denied, and her complaint was dismissed with prejudice.

Disability BenefitsSocial Security AppealsResidual Functional CapacityALJ Credibility AssessmentMedical NoncomplianceDiabetes MellitusFibromyalgiaAdjustment DisorderConsultative ExaminationTreating Physician Opinion
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 11, 2014

In re Haemmerle

The debtor, Thomas Haemmerle, moved to hold Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. in civil contempt for violating his Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge injunction. Haemmerle's personal liability on a mortgage loan was discharged in 2006, despite Wells Fargo not being initially scheduled as a creditor. After the loan defaulted in 2011, Wells Fargo pursued collection efforts. Despite being notified of the discharge in 2013, Wells Fargo continued to make numerous phone calls and send letters asserting Haemmerle's personal liability. The court ruled that Haemmerle's personal liability was discharged by operation of law and that Wells Fargo knowingly and willfully violated the discharge injunction, awarding attorneys' fees and $69,500 in punitive damages.

Bankruptcy LawDischarge InjunctionCivil ContemptCreditor NotificationNo-Asset BankruptcyPersonal LiabilityIn Rem RightsPunitive DamagesAttorneys' FeesEmotional Distress Claims
References
37
Case No. 12-CV-7527 (JMF)
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

This civil fraud case, brought by the United States against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Kurt Lofrano, addresses a novel issue in the Second Circuit: whether an employee can assert an advice-of-counsel defense by disclosing privileged communications when the employer holds the privilege and refuses to waive it. Defendant Kurt Lofrano sought to use advice from Wells Fargo's counsel as a complete defense against claims under the False Claims Act and FIRREA. Wells Fargo, however, moved for a protective order to prevent the disclosure of its attorney-client privileged communications. The Court, citing Supreme Court precedent in Swidler & Berlin, concluded that a balancing test between the importance of evidence and the attorney-client privilege is not applicable in civil cases. Consequently, the Court granted Wells Fargo's motion for a protective order, precluding Lofrano from asserting the advice-of-counsel defense using the Bank's privileged information.

Attorney-Client PrivilegeAdvice of Counsel DefenseCorporate PrivilegeEmployee Privilege WaiverProtective OrderCivil FraudFalse Claims ActFIRREAImplied WaiverEvidentiary Rules
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Angwin v. SRF Partnership, L. P.

Wells Fargo Alarm Services, Inc., the defendant third-party plaintiff, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, which granted summary judgment to Kinray, Inc., the third-party defendant, and denied Wells Fargo's cross-motion for contractual indemnification. The dispute arose after Katherine Angwin, a Kinray employee, was injured by a magnetic lock from an alarm system installed by Wells Fargo under an agreement with Kinray. Wells Fargo sought common-law and contractual indemnification from Kinray, but the Supreme Court dismissed the claims. The appellate court affirmed the decision, concluding that Angwin's injuries did not meet the "grave injury" threshold under Workers' Compensation Law § 11 for common-law indemnification. Furthermore, the court found the contractual indemnification clause did not cover the specific claim and, even if it did, it would be unenforceable under General Obligations Law § 5-323.

Contractual IndemnificationCommon-Law IndemnificationSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation LawGrave InjuryPersonal InjuryThird-Party ActionAlarm SystemNegligent InstallationGeneral Obligations Law
References
7
Case No. ADJ2328480 (MON 0329780)
Regular
Feb 17, 2016

RACHEL WELLS vs. SELTZER FONTAINE BECKWITH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves applicant Rachel Wells seeking reconsideration of a prior Board decision that granted the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. Previously, the Board found the defendant's Utilization Review (UR) process was timely, rescinded an administrative law judge's award, and remanded for further proceedings. Wells now asks the Board to vacate that decision and deny the defendant's initial petition. The Board reviewed the matter and, for the reasons stated in its prior opinion, denied Wells's Petition for Reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and OrderFindings of Fact and AwardUtilization ReviewAdministrative Law JudgeRescindVacateSCIFMarina Del Rey
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 563 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