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. 528566
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Christine Kelly (Kelly, Kevin (dec'd)

Claimant Christine Kelly filed a claim for death benefits after her husband's death, alleging it was causally-related to his established asbestos-related occupational disease. Liability for the original disability claim had been transferred to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases in 2011. The employer argued the Special Fund should be liable for the death benefits claim. However, the Workers' Compensation Board and the Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed that the death benefits claim was a new and distinct claim, accruing at the time of death in 2016. Therefore, its transfer to the Special Fund was precluded by Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a (1-a), as the Special Fund closed to new applications effective January 1, 2014, a ruling supported by Matter of Verneau v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc. The decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, ruling that liability did not shift to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases, was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Law § 25-aSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesDeath Benefits ClaimOccupational DiseaseAsbestosisCausally Related DeathLiability TransferStatutory Cut-off DateAppellate DivisionThird Judicial Department
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ostrander v. Ostrander

The case involves an appeal by the petitioner from an amended order of the Family Court of Cortland County, which granted the respondent sole legal custody of their two children. The parties' marriage, which began in August 1983, was troubled by frequent arguments, particularly regarding the discipline of their adopted son, Ryan. After the petitioner left the marital home in January 1987, the children remained with the respondent, who has cared for them since. The Family Court's decision to award custody to the respondent was based on a multifaceted inquiry, considering factors such as the children's best interests, stability in their living situation, and the recommendations from a social worker and Law Guardian. The appellate court affirmed the decision, finding no basis to disturb the Family Court's determination.

custodyfamily lawchild custodydomestic relations lawbest interests of the childparental fitnessvisitationappellate reviewjudicial discretionmarital dispute
References
7
Case No. ADJ9394000
Regular
Apr 13, 2015

CHRISTINE REDDEN vs. MJT ENTERPRISE, INC. dba BLUE RIBBON PERSONNEL, CASTLE POINT NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the judge's decision, upholding the applicant's psychiatric injury claim. The WCAB gave significant weight to the judge's credibility determinations, finding no substantial evidence to overturn them. The Board also admonished the defendant's counsel for misrepresenting the evidentiary record in their petition. The applicant's injury was deemed not barred by the "6-month rule" because the incident was found to be a "sudden and extraordinary" event.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMJT EnterpriseInc.Castle Point National Insurance CompanyYork Risk Services GroupInc.ADJ9394000WCJ credibility determinationsGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re David J.

This dissenting opinion argues against the Family Court's decision to return Candice, Christine, and David to their parents, Roslyn K. and Steven K., after the petitioner charged the parents with neglect. The parents previously fled the state with the children, violating a court order. The dissent cites medical neglect of the daughters, alleged physical abuse and extreme isolation of David by his stepfather, and the mother's refusal to send David to school. The dissenting judge concludes that the parents' non-compliance and bizarre behavior create an imminent risk to the children's well-being, advocating for continued foster care.

Child neglectParental non-complianceChild welfareFamily Court proceedingsChild abuse allegationsMedical care refusalEducational neglectDissenting opinionBest interests of childTemporary removal order
References
9
Case No. ADJ3316075 (VNO 0426272), ADJ3521326 (VNO 0294306)
Regular
Jun 28, 2012

CHRISTINE COLFER AUCHTERLONIE vs. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Ralphs Grocery Company's petition for reconsideration to address the apportionment of applicant Christine Colfer Auchterlonie's permanent disability. The Board found the prior determination of 100% permanent disability, without apportionment for fibromyalgia, lacked sufficient medical evidence under Labor Code sections 4663 and 4664. Consequently, the case was returned to the trial level for the appointment of a regular physician to evaluate apportionment, particularly concerning the overlap between the applicant's prior industrial injuries and her current fibromyalgia condition. A new decision will be issued after this further evaluation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code section 4664Labor Code section 4663Cumulative Trauma InjuryFibromyalgiaPhysician Evaluation
References
0
Case No. ADJ7484646
Regular
Apr 26, 2012

CHRISTINE SPIGNER vs. NEC ELECTRONICS, MITSUI SUMITOMO MARINE MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Christine Spigner's Petition for Reconsideration in the case against NEC Electronics and Mitsui Sumitomo Marine Management. The dismissal was based on the petition's failure to be verified, a violation of Labor Code section 5902. This procedural defect rendered the petition invalid. The Board's decision was consistent with established precedent regarding unverified petitions.

Petition for ReconsiderationVerifiedLabor Code section 5902DismissalWCJ ReportWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ7484646SpignerNEC ElectronicsMitsui Sumitomo Marine Management
References
2
Case No. STK 0204017
Regular
Feb 25, 2008

CHRISTINE BROOME vs. MEADOWS CAMERA/WOLF CAMERA, INC., SENTRY INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Christine Broome's petition for reconsideration because she withdrew it through stipulations. The Board will return the remaining stipulations to the Workers' Compensation Judge for further action. This order officially dismisses the petition filed after the December 19, 2007 decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawn PetitionDismissed PetitionWCABStipulationsWCJApplicantDefendantSentry InsuranceMeadows Camera
References
0
Case No. ADJ7762332
Regular
Nov 02, 2011

CHRISTINE NGUYEN vs. QUALCOMM, INC., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Christine Nguyen's Petition for Reconsideration of an approved Compromise and Release Agreement. Nguyen sought to set aside the $2,500 settlement, but the Board found she failed to allege fraud, duress, or mutual mistake. The Board noted that the settlement, once approved, has the force of a judgment and cannot be unilaterally rescinded. Additionally, the defendant received a strong admonishment for attaching unpermitted documents to its answer.

Petition for ReconsiderationCompromise and Release AgreementWCAB Rule 10842(c)Injury AOE/COEGood Faith Personnel ActionStatute of LimitationsIn Pro PerPetition to Quash SubpoenaJudge Pro TemOrder Approving Compromise and Release
References
3
Case No. ADJ3403915 (VNO 0300008) ADJ952201 (VNO 0294308) ADJ3316075 (VNO 0426272) ADJ3521326 (VNO 0294306)
Regular
Jul 03, 2018

CHRISTINE COLFER AUCHTERLONIE vs. THE KROGER COMPANY dba RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal in the case of Christine Colfer Auchterlonie v. The Kroger Company. The Board affirmed the Workers' Compensation Judge's decision, finding that removal is an extraordinary remedy not warranted here. The defendant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm that would justify granting removal. Furthermore, the Board concluded that reconsideration will be an adequate remedy should a final adverse decision occur.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJ ReportExtraordinary RemedyAllegationsMerits of ArgumentsAdministrative Law Judge
References
2
Case No. ADJ6770647
Regular
Jul 21, 2010

AMY CHRISTINE LENTINE vs. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FULLERTON, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's decision regarding Amy Christine Lentine's claim. The Board affirmed the finding that the claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. However, the issue of whether Lentine sustained an industrial injury was deferred and remanded to the WCJ for further proceedings. This means the compensability of the injury itself still needs to be determined.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAMY CHRISTINE LENTINECALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FULLERTONSEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESADJ6770647RECONSIDERATIONSTATUTE OF LIMITATIONSINDUSTRIAL INJURYPSYCHETEETH
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 46 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