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. ADJ977533 (GOL 0101844)
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

VICTOR LEMUS vs. BACARA RESORT & SPA, LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendants, Bacara Resort & Spa and Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, regarding a September 24, 2013 decision. The applicant is Victor Lemus. The defendants have withdrawn their petition for reconsideration. Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has dismissed the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawn PetitionDismissed PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardBacara Resort & SpaLiberty Mutual Fire Insurance CompanyVictor LemusADJ977533GOL 0101844Van Nuys District Office
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

THOMAS, PIA v. DUNKIRK RESORT PROPERTIES, LLC

Plaintiff commenced an action to recover damages for injuries sustained during employment at a hotel owned by defendant Dunkirk Resort Properties, LLC (Dunkirk Resort) and managed by her employer, nonparty S & K Hospitality, LLC (S & K). The Supreme Court erred in granting Dunkirk Resort's motion for summary judgment. The court rejected the out-of-possession landlord standard as applied by the lower court because no leasehold was created by the agreement between Dunkirk Resort and S & K; rather, it was a management agreement. Additionally, Dunkirk Resort's submissions raised a triable issue of fact regarding its out-of-possession landlord status. Furthermore, Dunkirk Resort failed to establish the applicability of the Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 exclusivity provision, as triable issues of fact remain concerning whether Dunkirk Resort is the alter ego of S & K, given their distinct purposes, bank accounts, and tax returns despite shared members.

Summary JudgmentOut-of-Possession LandlordAlter EgoManagement AgreementLease Operating AgreementPremises LiabilityCorporate VeilEmployment InjuryAppellate ReviewTriable Issue of Fact
References
13
Case No. ADJ10588071, ADJ9823909
Regular
Feb 02, 2023

LILLIAN LONA vs. THE DISNEYLAND RESORT, DISNEY ANAHEIM

Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer: Applicant Lillian Lona sought an extension for her Supplemental Job Displacement Benefit (SJDB) voucher, which expired March 18, 2021, due to COVID-19 restrictions. She argued the pandemic created a legal impossibility preventing her from utilizing the voucher for computer training. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) found that the unprecedented pandemic circumstances indeed created a legal impossibility excusing timely compliance with the statutory two-year voucher limit. Consequently, the WCAB granted Lona an additional 15 months from the Opinion's service date to use her SJDB voucher.

Supplemental Job Displacement BenefitSJDB voucherLabor Code section 4658.7(f)Executive Order N-33-20COVID-19 pandemicstay-at-home orderlegal impossibilitytollingvocational retrainingcomputer training
References
10
Case No. ADJ11388346
Regular
Apr 08, 2019

RAMONA LEON vs. DISNEYLAND RESORT

In *Leon v. Disneyland Resort*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed. The WCAB clarified that a petition must be *received* by the Board within the statutory 25-day period, not merely mailed. Since the petition was received on February 6, 2019, after the January 28, 2019 deadline, it was dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionDismissalFiling DeadlineService by MailJurisdictional DeadlineFindings and OrderWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeCalifornia Labor Code
References
4
Case No. ADJ7481094
Regular
Nov 19, 2012

ARTURO MARTINEZ vs. DISNEYLAND RESORT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration in the case of *Martinez v. Disneyland Resort* following a petition by lien claimant Safety Works Medical, Inc. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB aims to fully understand the record to issue a just decision. All future communications regarding this case must now be submitted in writing to the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not to any district office or e-filed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLien ClaimantStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After ReconsiderationCommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management SystemDisneyland ResortSafety Works Medical
References
0
Case No. GOL 0097165
Regular
Jul 12, 2007

LILIA ROJAS vs. EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY (BACARA RESORT AND SPA)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a denial of a lien claimant's charges for chiropractic services. The WCJ initially denied the lien, believing some payments had been made and the balance exceeded a statutory cap. However, both the lien claimant and the defendant confirmed no payments were made, leading to confusion about the WCJ's reasoning. The Board rescinded the decision and returned the matter to the trial level for clarification and a new decision due to factual discrepancies in the record.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationWCJLabor Code section 4604.5(d)(1)chiropractic treatmentacupunctureNCVbill reviewerFindings of FactReport on Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

GURNEY'S INN RESORT & SPA LTD. v. Benjamin

Gurney’s Inn Resort & Spa Ltd. (plaintiff) initiated a declaratory judgment action in state court against its Board members Linda Benjamin, Thomas Carusona, and Christopher Bennett to determine voting rights. Benjamin removed the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiff moved to remand, arguing a lack of complete diversity and non-compliance with the rule of unanimity. The Court applied the 'collision of interests' test, finding that Carusona and Bennett's interests aligned with Gurney's against Benjamin's. Consequently, the Court realigned Carusona and Bennett as plaintiffs, thereby creating complete diversity and excusing the failure to obtain their consent for removal. The Court denied the plaintiff's motion to remand for lack of federal jurisdiction.

Diversity JurisdictionRemand MotionRealignment of PartiesComplete DiversityRule of UnanimityDeclaratory JudgmentBoard of Directors DisputeVoting RightsSubject Matter JurisdictionFederal Court Jurisdiction
References
49
Case No. ADJ6679127; ADJ8075022
Regular
Dec 13, 2012

GUILLERMINA FIGUEROA vs. MARTIN RESORT, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

In *Figueroa v. Martin Resort*, the applicant sought to remove an order continuing a workers' compensation case to trial. The applicant argued for consolidation with a related cumulative trauma claim involving a different insurer under WCAB Rule 10589. The defendant opposed this removal. The Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the reasoning of the administrative law judge. Consequently, the case remains set for trial on December 18, 2012.

Petition for RemovalWCAB Rule 10589ConsolidationCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryAdministrative Law JudgeAppeals BoardReport and RecommendationStatus ConferenceWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2001

Jurgens v. Whiteface Resort on Lake Placid, L.P.

A construction worker, employed by Central Adirondack, Inc., was injured on July 10, 1998, when a decayed tree fell onto his pickup truck at a real estate development. The worker filed a lawsuit against Whiteface Development, Whiteface Resort, Vermont-Friesland, and Adirondack Home Builders, Ltd., alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law sections, claiming the defendants had knowledge of the hazardous tree. While claims under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) were withdrawn, the Supreme Court denied the defendants' motions for summary judgment on the remaining Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims. The Appellate Court affirmed this denial, citing unresolved factual disputes regarding the defendants' ownership interests in the land and their constructive notice of the tree's dangerous condition.

Construction InjuryPremises LiabilityLabor LawSummary JudgmentNegligenceProperty Owner LiabilityHazardous ConditionAppellate ReviewExpert TestimonyThird-Party Action
References
13
Case No. ADJ2424214 (RIV 0082507)
Regular
Nov 21, 2008

KATI FREEMAN vs. PALA CASINO RESORT & SPA, TRIBAL FIRST

In this workers' compensation case, the employer, Pala Casino Resort & Spa, initially sought reconsideration of a decision finding jurisdiction over their claim, arguing tribal sovereign immunity. Subsequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's claim, determining it lacked jurisdiction. The employer then requested withdrawal of their reconsideration petition, which the Board granted, dismissing the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPala Casino Resort & SpaTribal Firstsovereign immunitytribal jurisdictiongeneral appearancewaiver of immunityfederally recognized Indian tribeadministrative law judgePetition for Reconsideration
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 69 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