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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Integrated Construction Services, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance

Integrated Construction Services, Inc. (Integrated) purchased a commercial general liability policy from Scottsdale Insurance Company (Scottsdale). Integrated received delayed and initially incorrect notifications about a worker's injury. After clarifying details, Integrated notified Scottsdale, which denied coverage citing late notice. Integrated then filed a declaratory judgment action to compel Scottsdale to defend and indemnify it. Scottsdale's motion to dismiss the complaint was denied by the Supreme Court. On appeal, the order denying dismissal was affirmed, as Integrated adequately pleaded reasonable delay and Scottsdale's documentary evidence was insufficient to refute the claim.

Commercial General LiabilityInsurance PolicyDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyLate NoticeDeclaratory JudgmentMotion to DismissCPLR 3211(a)(1)CPLR 3211(a)(7)Documentary Evidence
References
10
Case No. ADJ1182220 (WCK 0044768) ADJ144318 (WCK 0044769)
Regular
Feb 27, 2009

RICHARD CRUZ vs. AMERICAN PROTECTIVE SERVICES INC., CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an award to Richard Cruz. The Board adopted the findings of the Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) who found that the applicant sustained a specific industrial spinal injury on December 16, 1997, and a cumulative trauma spinal injury through January 28, 1998, while employed by American Protective Services. The WCJ found the applicant credible and relied on the opinions of two medical evaluators, Dr. Brose and Dr. Lavorgna, who ultimately supported the finding of industrial injuries. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination and incorporated the WCJ's report, denying the defendant's petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedWCJ ReportCredibility FindingIndustrial InjurySpecific InjuryCumulative TraumaSpine InjurySecurity GuardAgreed Medical Evaluator
References
1
Case No. ADJ4303823
Regular
Dec 11, 2008

GLORIA BUSTOS vs. BAYSIDE SERVICES/STAFFING, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION through their servicing facility CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, INC., for LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of retroactive VRMA, finding that merely listing vocational rehabilitation as an issue in applications did not establish a good faith demand for services. However, the Board rescinded the denial of attorney's fees under LC 5814.5, remanding the issue for further determination in light of the en banc decision in *Ramirez v. Drive Financial Services*. This ruling clarifies that LC 5814.5 applies to delays occurring after January 1, 2003, regardless of the injury date.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVocational Rehabilitation Maintenance AllowanceQualified Injured WorkerLabor Code section 5814.5Date of InjuryDate of AwardApplication for Adjudication of ClaimGood Faith DemandRehabilitation UnitUnreasonable Delay
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Plaintiff Volt Technical Services Corp. applied for H-2 visas for nuclear start-up technicians, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) denied, asserting the need was permanent, not temporary. After the denial was affirmed on appeal, Volt filed suit, alleging the INS's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the INS's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act § 101(a)(15)(H)(ii), which requires the employer's need for services to be temporary, not just the individual assignments. Finding that Volt demonstrated a recurring need for such technicians over several years, the court granted the INS's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Volt's.

Immigration LawH-2 visasNonimmigrant WorkersTemporary EmploymentImmigration and Nationality ActAdministrative Procedures ActDeclaratory Judgment ActAgency InterpretationJudicial ReviewNuclear Industry
References
5
Case No. RIV 0043397
Regular
Feb 25, 2008

GUILLERMINA GARCIA vs. EMPRESS CASTELL/DEL RIO'S TAQUERIA, CALIFORNIA GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION by its SERVICING FACILITY, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES GROUP, INC., for FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY, in liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to a lien claimant, Psychological Assessment Services, whose lien was dismissed for failure to appear at a hearing. The Board found the dismissal potentially erroneous due to disputed service of notice and awarded a hearing on the merits. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Lien claimantPsychological Assessment ServicesReconsiderationDismissal with prejudiceEDEXService of processNotice of hearingObjectionWCJDue process
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Americredit Financial Services, Inc. v. Oxford Management Services

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (AmeriCredit) commenced an action to confirm an arbitration award against Oxford Management Services (OMS). OMS cross-moved to vacate the award, alleging the arbitrator exceeded his powers by dismissing a counterclaim and manifestly disregarded the law. The arbitrator had dismissed OMS's counterclaim for spoilation of evidence. The Court affirmed the arbitrator's decision, finding he did not exceed his authority under the RSA by dismissing the counterclaim or by interpreting the contract terms regarding account termination. The Court also found no manifest disregard for the law, concluding the arbitrator's decision was rationally supported by the record. Consequently, AmeriCredit's motion to confirm the award was granted, and OMS's motion to vacate was denied.

Arbitration Award ConfirmationArbitration Award VacaturFederal Arbitration ActManifest Disregard of LawArbitrator PowersSpoilation of EvidenceContract InterpretationCollection Agency DisputeSummary ProceedingJudicial Review of Arbitration
References
41
Case No. VN0 0440027
Regular
Jan 15, 2008

GUADALUPE SANCHEZ ROJAS vs. MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERVICES, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES

This case involves a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision that significantly reduced their lien amount. The Board dismissed the petition primarily because it was not properly verified and lacked a required proof of service on all adverse parties. Additionally, the lien claimant's representative lacked standing to file the petition due to failure to formally appear or substitute as attorney.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJMedical treatmentLien trialMissing exhibitsVerification defectProof of serviceSubstitution of attorneys
References
4
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 09632 [134 AD3d 648]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 29, 2015

Bonaerge v. Leighton House Condominium

Plaintiff Linares Bonaerge was injured when a steel structure being lowered by coworkers slipped and struck him. The court affirmed a judgment granting contractual indemnification claims from Leighton House Condominium and Cooper Square Realty against Integrated Construction Services, Inc., and from Integrated against Rockledge Scaffold Corp. The court also affirmed the grant of partial summary judgment to the plaintiff on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Leighton and Integrated, finding a causal connection between the inadequately regulated descent of the object and the plaintiff's injury, and rejecting arguments of de minimis height differential or plaintiff's sole proximate cause.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor Law § 240(1)Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewScaffold LawFalling ObjectStatutory AgentProximate Cause
References
13
Case No. AHM 0048021
Regular
Apr 02, 2008

SEBASTIAN CORNIEL vs. KASLER CORPORATION, Permissibly SelfInsured, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an award for pool and lawn maintenance services. The Board found that the prescribed services, intended to prevent re-injury while performing these activities, were not medically necessary under Labor Code Section 4600. The medical reports lacked substantial evidence by failing to connect the activities directly to curing or relieving the effects of the applicant's industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKasler CorporationCambridge Integrated Servicespool and lawn maintenancemedical awardpermanent disabilityfuture medical careLabor Code §4600substantial evidenceancillary services
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kessel v. Public Service Commission

This case involves an appeal challenging a rate increase granted to the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) by the Public Service Commission. LILCO had requested the increase due to severe financial difficulties and the anticipated non-operation of its Shoreham nuclear plant, leading to a "Financial Stability Adjustment" (FSA) to improve cash flow without increasing income. Petitioners initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, asserting that the Commission failed to exercise proper discretion, did not adequately consider ratepayers' interests, and improperly shifted the burden of proof. The court affirmed the Commission's decision, finding that it had appropriately balanced the interests of consumers and investors to preserve LILCO's financial integrity and ensure reliable service. The court also dismissed allegations regarding the burden of proof and judicial bias, concluding that the Commission's determinations were rational and supported by the record.

Rate IncreasePublic Service CommissionLong Island Lighting Company (LILCO)Financial Stability Adjustment (FSA)Utility RegulationAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewUtility RatesShoreham Nuclear PlantBurden of Proof
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 7,356 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