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. Docket No. 10
Regular Panel Decision

Zhong v. August August Corp.

Plaintiff Jian Zhong filed a class action against defendant August August Corp. alleging denial of overtime compensation and minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Minimum Wage Act (NYMWA). Defendant August filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. The court granted the motion in part, dismissing the FLSA overtime claims and related state law claims, but denied it in part, allowing the FLSA minimum wage claims and related state law claims to proceed. Plaintiff Zhong was granted leave to amend the complaint to address the deficiencies in the dismissed claims.

FLSANYMWAWage and Hour DisputeOvertime CompensationMinimum Wage ViolationMotion to DismissRule 12(b)(6) MotionLeave to AmendClass Action PotentialSupplemental Jurisdiction
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 01, 2002

Claim of Petitt v. Eaton & Van Winkle

The claimant was injured in a 1993 elevator accident but did not file a workers' compensation claim until 1999. The Workers' Compensation Board dismissed the claim as time-barred under Workers' Compensation Law § 28, which mandates dismissal if a claim is not filed within two years of the accident. On appeal, the claimant argued the employer and carrier waived the § 28 defense by failing to timely raise it and by making advance payments. The Board found the defense was timely raised at the first hearing and determined that the employer's one-day wage payment was sick leave, not an advance payment of compensation. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board's findings were supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationStatute of LimitationsTime-Barred ClaimWaiver DefenseAdvance Payment of CompensationSick Leave PolicyAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionElevator Accident
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 28, 2009

Claim of Haight v. Edison

The claimant appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision from March 9, 2009, as amended on August 28, 2009. The Board had ruled that the claimant was entitled to permanent partial disability benefits for shoulder and back injuries, rather than a schedule loss of use award for the shoulder alone. The appeal contested this classification, arguing for a schedule loss award. The court affirmed the Board’s decision, stating that the determination of whether a condition warrants a schedule loss award or continuing disability benefits is a factual question for the Board, and its finding was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilitySchedule Loss of UseShoulder InjuryBack InjuryOngoing TreatmentArthritisAdhesive CapsulitisSubstantial EvidenceFactual Determination
References
8
Case No. ADJ6908000
Regular
Sep 30, 2013

JOSE YANEZ vs. MORE FASHION, INC., TOWER SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered By ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC

This case involves a workers' compensation claim for a cumulative injury. The applicant alleged injury to his psyche, extremities, and back. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the date of injury, finding it to be August 5, 2009, based on when the applicant first suffered disability and knew it was work-related. The Court determined that while medical treatment occurred earlier, there was no substantial evidence of disability or knowledge of industrial causation until the later date. The period of liability for the employer was established as August 4, 2008, through August 4, 2009.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative InjuryDate of InjuryDisabilityLast Day of WorkLabor Code Section 5412Labor Code Section 5500.5Aggrieved PartyJudicial NoticeFindings and Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ3853793 (SRO 0141299)
Regular
Feb 23, 2015

CHRISTINA LAURA LEPE DUARTE vs. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the end date of temporary disability payments. The Board previously amended an award to extend temporary disability to August 7, 2009. The defendant argued this violated Labor Code section 4656's two-year limitation. However, the Board denied reconsideration, reaffirming that under *Hawkins v. Amberwood Products*, the two-year period begins on the date of the first *payment* of temporary disability, not when it was first owed. Since the first payment was August 8, 2007, the 104-week period validly extended to August 7, 2009.

ADJ3853793FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANYHARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANYLabor Code section 4656temporary disabilitycompensable weeksdate of commencement of temporary disability paymentHawkins v. Amberwood Productsindustrial injuryneck
References
1
Case No. 71 Civ 2877
Regular Panel Decision

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Local 638

The plaintiff, EEOC, brought an Order to Show Cause alleging that Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association and its Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee (Local 28 JAC) were successors in interest to Local 10 and Local 10 JAC. The EEOC contended that Local 10 and Local 10 JAC had violated a 1973 federal district court order prohibiting discrimination against Black and Puerto Rican individuals. A Special Master was appointed and found that Local 28 was indeed the successor in interest to Local 10. The District Court affirmed the Special Master's finding, concluding that successor liability attached to Local 28. This decision was based on several key factors: the formal merger of Local 10 into Local 28, the substantial continuity of the business enterprise, Local 28's prior notice of Local 10's liabilities and the existing judicial order, and the overarching importance of federal policies, including upholding federal court judgments and promoting equal opportunity.

Successorship DoctrineLabor LawEmployment DiscriminationTitle VIIUnion MergerJudicial Order EnforcementRacial DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationSpecial Master FindingsFederal Policy
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 26, 1971

McLeod v. Sheet Metal Workers International Ass'n, Local Union 28

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) sought a temporary injunction against Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local Union 28, AFL-CIO, alleging secondary boycott and jurisdictional dispute violations of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The dispute arose from a construction project in New York City where the respondent union's members refused to install air-conditioning fans, claiming the associated masonry casing work belonged to them, not to bricklayers represented by another union (Bricklayers Local 34). The court found reasonable cause to believe the respondent engaged in unfair labor practices by attempting to force contractors to cease business with LaSalla Mason Corporation and to reassign the plenum construction work. Citing potential irreparable injury to the general contractor Diesel Construction, the court concluded that the requested injunctive relief was just and proper. Consequently, a temporary injunction was issued to restrain the respondent's actions.

Labor LawNational Labor Relations ActTemporary InjunctionSecondary BoycottJurisdictional DisputeUnfair Labor PracticesConstruction IndustrySheet Metal WorkersBricklayers UnionContract Dispute
References
2
Case No. ADJ971572 (SFO 0507738) ADJ2628237 (SFO 0507737)
Regular
Nov 16, 2009

JAMES VON BIMA, JR. vs. CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, Permissibly Self-Insured, C/O REMIF

The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration, granted the Petition for Removal, and rescinded the WCJ’s August 28, 2009 decision due to an inadequate record.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQME reportMaximum Medical ImprovementMMITreating PhysicianSubstantial EvidencePetition to Strike
References
3
Case No. ADJ11116979
Regular
Oct 19, 2018

DIANA RAY vs. PRG INSURANCE RECRUITERS, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because the underlying August 28, 2018 order was not a "final" order. The WCAB granted a petition for removal, finding that the WCJ's August 28, 2018 decision was interlocutory and not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's prior decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutoryProcedural OrderEvidentiary Decision
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 02, 2012

Keefe v. Aramatic Refreshment Services Inc.

The claimant had two established workers' compensation claims for back injuries from 2004 and 2009, with benefits equally apportioned. The dispute arose regarding the calculation of benefits for the 2009 claim, specifically whether to use the claimant's 2009 wages or the higher 2004 wages. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that the 2009 wages should be used for the 2009 claim, aligning with Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (5) and § 15 (7). The Appellate Division affirmed this aspect of the Board's decision. However, the Board's unexplained reduction of a temporary total disability award to a marked temporary partial disability was found to be an error, leading to a remittal of the matter to the Board for further proceedings to address this inconsistency.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuriesDisability BenefitsWage CalculationTemporary Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityStatutory InterpretationRemittalApportionmentJudicial Review
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 1,587 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