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

In re Daughtry A.

In a neglect proceeding under Family Court Act article 10, the mother appealed an amended order of fact-finding and disposition and an order of protection from the Family Court, Kings County. The appellate court dismissed the appeal from the order of protection, deeming it academic due to its expiration. The court affirmed the amended order of fact-finding and disposition, finding no violation of the mother's due process rights concerning the admission of her statements. The petitioner agency successfully established a prima facie case of neglect, which the mother failed to rebut with a credible explanation for the child's injuries.

Neglect ProceedingFamily Court Act Article 10Appellate ReviewFact-FindingDispositional HearingsOrder of ProtectionDue ProcessAdmissions as EvidencePrima Facie CasePreponderance of Evidence
References
7
Case No. ADJ10153514 ADJ10605281
Regular
Sep 30, 2019

ROBERTO CARDENAS vs. SANTA ISABEL ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a VALLARTA, SAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant alleging a specific injury to his right wrist, hand, and shoulder from a machine malfunction. The original Findings and Orders denied the claim, finding the applicant not credible, particularly due to discrepancies with a First Aid and Injury Notice. The Appeals Board rescinded this decision, finding that the WCJ failed to address the credible testimony of a eyewitness. The matter was returned for further proceedings to clarify evidence and credibility issues.

ADJ10153514ADJ10605281ROBERTO CARDENASSANTA ISABEL ENTERPRISESVALLARTASAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANYHAZELRIGG CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESWORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDOPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONFindings and Orders
References
5
Case No. ADJ6950787
Regular
Jun 22, 2012

JOSE BARRIENTOS vs. MARK GREENBERG, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued the administrative law judge (WCJ) abused discretion by finding the applicant credible, specifically regarding the duration of employment to exclude him from employee status under Labor Code §3352(h). The WCJ adopted the report recommending denial, emphasizing applicant's credible testimony regarding hours worked and pay, and finding the defendant's testimony less reliable due to a lack of direct knowledge. The Board extended great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, affirming the denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility findingLabor Code §3352(h)employee definitionconflicting testimonyobservational demeanorunreliable testimonyunrebutted testimony
References
1
Case No. ADJ10589181
Regular
Apr 04, 2019

KATHLEEN KEOUGH vs. MESA BEVERAGE COMPANY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA, BROADSPIRE SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed a prior decision finding that applicant sustained an industrial injury to her lumbar spine. The WCAB deferred to the WCJ's credibility assessment of the applicant and her spouse, finding their testimony regarding the injury's origin at work to be credible. The WCAB found the defendant failed to present substantial contrary evidence to overcome the WCJ's findings. Therefore, the March 22, 2018 Findings and Award was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKathleen KeoughMesa Beverage CompanyTravelers Property Casualty Company of AmericaBroadspire ServicesInc.ADJ10589181Findings and Awardreconsiderationindustrial injury
References
8
Case No. AHM 0093643
Regular
Nov 07, 2007

RUBEN DE LA TORRE vs. ST. JUDE HOSPITAL; Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) finding that the applicant was not credible and did not sustain an injury arising out of and in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The ALJ's report, which the Board adopted, emphasized the applicant's lack of credibility, failure to disclose pre-existing conditions, and the credibility of defense witnesses and medical evidence. The Board gave great weight to the ALJ's credibility findings.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportApplicant CredibilityInjury AOE/COEPermissibly Self-InsuredWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Pro PerFindings & OrderMedical Evidence
References
1
Case No. ADJ14871067
Regular
Feb 13, 2023

EDGAR GAMA vs. XTRACTOR DEPOT, LLC, 2020 LONG BEACH, LLC, THE HARTFORD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant was an employee of Xtractor Depot, LLC. The Board gave significant weight to the judge's credibility determination, finding no substantial evidence to warrant overturning it. The Board also noted the petitioner's improper attachment of exhibits to their petition. Ultimately, the applicant's credible testimony and unrebutted exhibits supported the original finding of industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Reconsideration DeniedWCJ Credibility DeterminationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Ostensible AuthorityEmployee StatusXtractor Depot LLCAndrew YoonCannabis IndustryWarehouse Explosion
References
4
Case No. ADJ10843290
Regular
Aug 21, 2018

MANUEL SOLIS vs. DECORE-ATIVE SPECIALTIES, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found that while an injury occurred, the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. This decision was based on the WCJ's credibility determinations, which found the applicant's testimony regarding reporting the injury to his employer to be not credible. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's observations of witness demeanor, finding no substantial evidence to warrant overturning these credibility findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ Credibility DeterminationsStatute of LimitationsLachesTimely Reporting of InjuryMachine OperatorRight Shoulder InjuryRight Arm InjurySpecific Injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ8186548
Regular
Jan 10, 2014

JOSE GONZALEZ TORRES vs. GREAT WALL SEAFOOD CORPORATION, TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, CNA CLAIMS PLUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge. The applicant's claim was denied based on inconsistent testimony and a lack of credible evidence establishing an employment relationship. Defense witnesses, including the company's general manager and secretary, credibly testified that the applicant was not an employee on the date of the alleged injury. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility findings, which were supported by substantial evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.employee statusloader/unloaderinconsistent testimonydeposition testimonywitness testimony
References
1
Case No. ADJ7442025
Regular
May 16, 2012

LENNIE WIDEN vs. IN HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that the applicant sustained a specific left shoulder injury in February 2009 based on her credible testimony and medical evidence. The Board affirmed the WCJ's credibility findings and also admonished defense counsel for failing to cite the record properly. The defendant's arguments regarding medical determinations, credibility, post-termination issues, and laches were rejected.

In Home Supportive ServicesState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.WCAB Rule 10842(b)home care providerleft shoulder injuryFebruary 2009credibility determination
References
1
Case No. ADJ9725074
Regular
May 25, 2016

RAFAEL GIL vs. WEBCOR BUILDERS, ZURICH INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision finding the applicant sustained an industrial injury to his head, neck, back, and right shoulder. The Board upheld the award of temporary disability, finding the applicant's testimony credible, supported by medical evidence. Defendants argued insufficient evidence for temporary disability, but the Board found no contrary evidence of substantial weight. The WCJ's findings on credibility and factual determinations were given great weight and were affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardTemporary Disability IndemnityWCJCredibility DeterminationsIndustrial InjuryContrary EvidenceAffirm DecisionScott Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 16,006 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