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. ADJ237780
Regular
Mar 19, 2009

AURELIO MERCADO vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns a dispute over a permanent disability rating for an injured worker, Aurelio Mercado. The WCJ initially found the applicant's vocational expert's opinion admissible, leading to a finding of total disability, and rejected the employer's apportionment argument. However, the Appeals Board rescinded this decision, citing recent en banc rulings in *Almaraz* and *Ogilvie* which clarified the standards for rebutting permanent disability ratings. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision consistent with these updated legal precedents regarding diminished future earning capacity and apportionment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAurelio MercadoTarget StoresSedgwick Claims Management ServicesAdmissibilityVocational ExpertJeff MalmuthDiminished Future Earning CapacityDFECPermanent Total Disability
References
5
Case No. ADJ8128134
Regular
Nov 06, 2014

ABRAHAM MERCADO vs. SUPER KING MARKETS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

This case involves Abraham Mercado's workers' compensation claim against Super King Markets and its insurer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued an order dismissing Mercado's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the grounds that the petition was filed untimely. The WCAB adopted the findings of the administrative law judge's Report and Recommendation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimelyDismissalSuper King MarketsCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationSedgwick Claims Management ServicesUllico Insurance CompanyLiquidationAdministrative Law Judge
References
0
Case No. ADJ7304100, ADJ7941132, ADJ7941133, ADJ7941134
Regular
Oct 28, 2011

MARI CARMEN MERCADO vs. VALLARTA FOOD ENTERPRISES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of an approved Compromise and Release agreement. The applicant, Mari Carmen Mercado, sought to withdraw from the settlement, claiming she did not understand the document and found the $10,000 settlement inadequate. The Board found that the applicant was represented by counsel and had the settlement explained by a certified Spanish interpreter, indicating she understood its terms. Furthermore, the settlement addressed disputed medical evidence and a potential defense under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10), making the Board's denial of reconsideration appropriate.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseIndustrial InjuryTaqueria CookSpecific InjuryCumulative TraumaAgreed Medical ExaminerLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)Post-Termination Defense
References
0
Case No. ADJ2704842 (VNO 0496917) ADJ3804892 (VNO 0496918)
Regular
Sep 12, 2014

AURELIO ROSALES vs. GIUMARRA VINEYARDS CORPORATION, ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Giumarra Vineyards Corporation and Arrowood Indemnity Company (Defendants) regarding an order in the workers' compensation claim of Aurelio Rosales. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was not taken from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was dismissed and removal was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightLiabilityWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGiumarra Vineyards CorporationArrowood Indemnity CompanyAurelio Rosales
References
10
Case No. ADJ8157719
Regular

NICOLAS MERCADO vs. CO-WEST COMMODITIES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, Nicolas Mercado filed a Petition for Removal. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the administrative law judge's report. Finding no grounds for removal, the Board denied the petition, adopting the judge's reasoning.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationULLICO Casualty CompanyliquidationPatriot Risk Servicesadministrative law judgeADJ8157719denial of removalBerman More & Gonzalez
References
0
Case No. ADJ10594852; ADJ10882589; ADJ10882630
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

AURELIO RAMIREZ vs. PARKHOUSE TIRES, INC.; TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration in the case of Aurelio Ramirez vs. Parkhouse Tires, Inc. and Travelers Property Casualty of America. The WCAB rescinded the original Findings, Order and Award (F&A) from January 14, 2021, and substituted new findings regarding applicant's permanent disabilities for multiple injuries. Specifically, it found a 38% permanent disability for a right index finger injury (ADJ10594852) and a 15% permanent disability for a back injury (ADJ10882630). The Board also determined that the defendant was not entitled to a credit for temporary disability overpayment and deferred the issue of attorney's fees. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings Order AwardTire TechnicianRight Index Finger InjuryBack InjuryHernia InjuryTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityMedical Treatment
References
32
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00196 [179 AD3d 1263]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2020

Matter of Castano v. Westchester Community Coll.

Aurelio Castano, a technical assistant and part-time teacher, filed a workers' compensation claim due to mold and chemical exposure, leading to reactive airway disease and fibromyalgia. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge classified him with a 78% loss of wage-earning capacity. A panel of the Workers' Compensation Board modified this to a 55% loss, considering his educational background and certifications. The full Board upheld this modification, and the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding it adequately explained and supported by substantial evidence. The court considered conflicting medical opinions and Castano's vocational capabilities.

Permanent Partial DisabilityLoss of Wage-Earning CapacityFibromyalgia ClaimReactive Airway DiseaseMold Exposure InjuryVocational FactorsMedical Expert TestimonyCredibility AssessmentAppellate Division Third DepartmentWorkers' Compensation Board
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State National Organization for Women v. Cuomo

This action addresses constitutional violations by the New York State Division of Human Rights (SDHR) for its delayed processing of discrimination complaints. Plaintiffs, including NOW, moved to amend their complaint to add Governor Pataki and Commissioner Mercado in their personal capacities and to include a third subclass for administrative convenience dismissals. NOW also sought to supplement its complaint with claims against Commissioner Mercado for new intake procedures and a preliminary injunction to halt their enforcement. The court affirmed the magistrate judge's recommendations, granting all of plaintiffs' motions, finding a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm to complainants due to SDHR's ambiguous and erratically applied new rules. A full bench trial is scheduled for June 8, 1998.

DiscriminationDue ProcessEqual ProtectionAdministrative DelayHuman Rights LawClass ActionPreliminary InjunctionMotion to AmendMotion to SupplementState Agency
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Mercado

The defendant appealed a judgment from the County Court of Washington County, convicting them of multiple counts of sodomy in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child. The charges stemmed from allegations made by the defendant's stepchildren. The appellate court found that while the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, the defendant was deprived of a fair trial due to the improper admission of expert testimony from a social worker. This testimony impermissibly compared the children's behavior to general characteristics of sexual abuse victims. Additionally, evidence concerning the 'sexual climate' of the household was deemed inadmissible as it sought to prove the defendant's predisposition to commit the crimes. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, and the matter was remitted for a new trial.

Sodomy First DegreeEndangering Welfare of a ChildAppellate ReviewExpert Witness TestimonyAdmissibility of EvidenceRape Trauma SyndromeAbused Child SyndromePropensity EvidencePrejudicial ErrorFair Trial
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 02, 2003

Faunteleroy v. Mercado

The mother appealed an order from the Family Court, Queens County, dated April 2, 2003, which transferred custody of her child to the father after a hearing. The appellate court affirmed the order, emphasizing the significant weight given to a hearing court's findings in custody cases, provided they are supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record. The court reiterated that the paramount consideration in awarding custody is the child's best interests, necessitating a modification only if the totality of circumstances warrants such a change. Factors considered include the quality of home environment, parental guidance, emotional and intellectual development, financial stability, parental fitness, and the duration of the current custody arrangement. The hearing court properly weighed these factors, observing both parents, hearing testimony from various individuals including a social worker, and interviewing the child in camera, ultimately awarding custody to the father.

Child CustodyFamily LawAppellate ReviewBest Interests of ChildCustody ModificationParental FitnessJudicial DiscretionEvidentiary HearingQueens CountyFamily Court Act
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 34 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