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. ADJ1541863 (SBR 0317921) ADJ1955130 (SBR 0318072)
Regular
Oct 24, 2008

CAROL TELIZYN vs. BRASWELL'S COLONIAL CARE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board dismissed Arrowback Medical Group's (AMG) petition for reconsideration because it was successive and not taken from a final order, as the prior decision remanded the case for further proceedings. The Board also corrected the caption of its August 8, 2008 decision nunc pro tunc to include both relevant case numbers. AMG's core argument regarding the applicability of an expired fee schedule was previously addressed and found to be without merit.

Nunc Pro TuncPetition for ReconsiderationSuccessive PetitionFinal OrderInterim OrderRemandCaption CorrectionRepackaged PharmaceuticalsOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleLien Claimant
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 1995

Brier v. City University

The respondent City University of New York's determination, dated August 13, 1995, to dismiss the petitioner from his role as Administrative Superintendent of Campus Buildings and Grounds at Lehman College, effective September 8, 1995, was unanimously confirmed. The petition was denied, and the CPLR article 78 proceeding, transferred from the Supreme Court, New York County, was dismissed. The court found that respondent's conclusions regarding the petitioner's failure to report lost keys, ensure proper facility cleaning and maintenance, and general incompetence were supported by substantial evidence, including testimony from the petitioner, superiors, and co-workers. No grounds were found to overturn the respondent's credibility assessments, and the penalty of dismissal was deemed appropriate, especially considering the petitioner's prior disciplinary history.

Public EmploymentAdministrative LawEmployee MisconductWorkplace DisciplineJudicial ReviewArticle 78 ProceedingLehman CollegeCity University of New YorkTermination of EmploymentSubstantial Evidence
References
1
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

In re the Arbitration of Controversies between Central Aviation & Marine Corp. & International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers

This case concerns a motion by a Union to compel arbitration based on an alleged collective bargaining agreement dated August 8, 1962. The Employer opposes arbitration, contending no valid contract was formed. Affidavits from both sides presented conflicting accounts of negotiation authority and intent, particularly regarding John F. Riley's power to bind the Employer. The National Labor Relations Board had previously found the August 8, 1962 document to be a collective bargaining contract for bar purposes in a separate decertification hearing. However, the District Court, finding the N.L.R.B. order not res judicata and based on the parties' conduct post-August 8, 1962, concluded that no collective bargaining agreement was entered into. Consequently, the Union's motion was denied and the Employer's cross-petition dismissed.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementContract ValidityLabor UnionEmployer-Employee RelationsNational Labor Relations Board (NLRB)NLRB OrderDecertification PetitionAuthority to ContractGood Faith Bargaining
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Martinez v. Kingston City School District

A claimant, injured in 2005, was awarded wage replacement benefits. Following an arrest for insurance fraud and an investigation including video surveillance, the employer sought to suspend benefits. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found the claimant knowingly misrepresented her volunteer activity with CitiVision to obtain benefits, violating Workers’ Compensation Law § 114-a (1), rescinding benefits from May 23, 2008, to November 9, 2009, and disqualifying future benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this. On appeal, the court found substantial evidence for the violation but modified the mandatory penalty, applying recision from August 8, 2008 (date of the false questionnaire) to November 9, 2009. The court also remitted the discretionary disqualification for future benefits, as the Board failed to provide a rationale.

Insurance FraudWorkers' Compensation BenefitsMisrepresentationVolunteer ActivityFalse StatementWage Replacement BenefitsPenalty RecisionDiscretionary PenaltyAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
12
Case No. ADJ4490816
Regular
Oct 24, 2008

GUADALUPE DELA MORA vs. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC, AMERICAN HOME INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order grants the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an August 8, 2008 decision. The Board requires further review of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future communications regarding this case should be directed to the Board's Reconsideration Unit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWal-Mart AssociatesAmerican Home InsuranceGuadalupe Dela MoraADJ4490816VNO 0511659August 8 2008October 24 2008Statutory time constraints
References
0
Case No. 2014-1942 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 22, 2017

AL Acupuncture, P.C. v. Geico Ins. Co.

This case, AL Acupuncture, P.C. v Geico Ins. Co., concerns an appeal from a Civil Court order regarding assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The plaintiff, AL Acupuncture, P.C., sought summary judgment for services rendered, while defendant Geico Insurance Company cross-moved for dismissal. The Appellate Term modified the lower court's order. It denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on claims from September 8 to September 25, 2008, citing the plaintiff's failure to prove the claim was not timely denied and issues with IME scheduling evidence. Conversely, the court granted the defendant's cross-motion, dismissing claims for services from July 8 to September 5, 2008, as Geico demonstrated timely denial and payment under the workers' compensation fee schedule. The order was affirmed as modified.

No-fault benefitsSummary judgmentIndependent medical examinationsTimely denialWorkers' compensation fee scheduleAcupuncture servicesAppellate TermProvider actionAssigned claimsCivil Court order
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Leban Store Fixture Co. v. Properties

The plaintiff, a secured creditor, sold equipment to Picnic Parlor of Westbury, Inc. via a conditional sales agreement. Picnic Parlor defaulted and abandoned the premises owned by August Properties, Inc. August Properties subsequently refused the plaintiff access to remove the collateral unless demands for rent arrears, insurance, and a cash bond were met. The plaintiff complied with the bond and proof of ownership requests but refused rent and insurance, arguing it was not the tenant. The plaintiff then initiated a conversion action against August Properties. The trial court found August Properties liable for unreasonably interfering with the plaintiff's immediate right to possession of the collateral. The appellate court affirmed this decision, citing UCC 9-503 and 9-313 (8), stating that a landlord cannot refuse a secured party permission to remove collateral if statutory requirements are met, beyond requesting proof of ownership and a removal bond.

Conversion of personal propertySecured creditor rightsUCC Article 9Landlord-tenant disputeDefault on security agreementRight to possession of collateralUnreasonable interferenceAuctioneer's saleConditional sales agreementReal estate owner obligations
References
7
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
Showing 1-10 of 1,865 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