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. Motion sequence Nos. 002 and 005
Regular Panel Decision

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Escape Media Group, Inc.

UMG Recordings, Inc. sued Escape Media Group, Inc. for common-law copyright infringement and unfair competition. Escape asserted DMCA safe harbor and CDA preemption defenses, along with Donnelly Act and tortious interference counterclaims. The court denied UMG's motion to dismiss the DMCA safe harbor defense, ruling it applies to pre-1972 recordings. However, the court granted UMG's motion to dismiss the CDA preemption defense, clarifying that the CDA's intellectual property exemption covers both federal and state laws. Additionally, Escape's Donnelly Act counterclaim was dismissed, but UMG's motions to dismiss the tortious interference counterclaims were denied, rejecting defenses like the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and economic interest.

Copyright InfringementDMCA Safe HarborPre-1972 RecordingsUnfair CompetitionCommunications Decency ActTortious InterferenceDonnelly ActNew York Common LawInternet Service ProvidersAntitrust
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State Police v. Charles Q.

A State Trooper, acquitted of criminal charges, had his criminal records sealed. His employer, the State Police (petitioner), subsequently sought to unseal these records for use in a disciplinary proceeding. The County Court initially granted the application to unseal. On appeal, the court reversed the County Court's order, ruling that the State Police, when conducting a disciplinary proceeding against one of its employees, is not acting as a 'law enforcement agency' under CPL 160.50 (1) (d) (ii) and thus has no statutory right to access sealed records. Furthermore, the court found that the petitioner failed to meet the 'compelling demonstration' required for exercising the court's inherent power to unseal records, as it did not demonstrate that other investigative avenues had been exhausted or were unavailable. Consequently, the application to unseal the records was denied.

Sealed recordsCriminal Procedure Law 160.50Disciplinary proceedingState TrooperPublic employerLaw enforcement agencyInherent court powerUnsealing recordsAppellate reviewAdministrative determination
References
6
Case No. ADJ3374876
Regular
Nov 24, 2009

SUSAN K. MOYERS vs. SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFIT TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

The petition for reconsideration is granted to allow further study of the factual and legal issues. Reconsideration will allow for a complete understanding of the record and a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubsequent Injuries Benefit Trust FundPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionCommissioners' OfficeService by MailState Compensation Insurance Fund
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mister Vee Productions, Inc. v. LeBlanc

This case involves a dispute over copyright infringement and breach of contract. Three corporations—Mister Vee, Delightful, and Vigor—sued individuals known as The Rhythm Makers, Paul Service, and corporations Arista Records, G.Q. Publishing, and Arista Music. Delightful alleged copyright infringement for the song 'Soul On Your Side.' Mister Vee and Vigor claimed The Rhythm Makers breached an exclusive agreement by recording other songs with Arista. The court addressed defendants' motion to dismiss non-copyright claims due to lack of pendent jurisdiction. The court ultimately declined jurisdiction and dismissed the state law claims, finding they did not share a 'common nucleus of operative fact' with the federal copyright claim.

Copyright InfringementBreach of ContractPendent JurisdictionFederal CourtState Law ClaimsMusic Industry DisputeExclusive Recording AgreementMotion to DismissJudicial EconomyCommon Nucleus of Operative Fact
References
12
Case No. ADJ2834514
Regular
Oct 21, 2011

VAIOS KALOMIROS vs. AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES (aka VARIAN, INC.)

The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition to allow further study of the factual and legal issues. This action is necessary for a complete understanding of the record and to issue a just decision. Further proceedings may be determined as appropriate.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAgilent TechnologiesSpecialty Risk PleasantonVaios KalomirosStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issuesJust and reasoned decisionDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the Commissioners
References
0
Case No. SRO 0132519
Regular
Apr 25, 2008

WILLIAM SHOFFEITT vs. HAL-CO BUILDERS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. This action is taken to allow further review of the factual and legal issues, ensuring a complete understanding for a just decision. The WCAB will now study the record and may conduct further proceedings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationGRANTINGHAL-CO BUILDERSSTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDSTATUTORY TIME CONSTRAINTSFACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUESJUST AND REASONED DECISIONDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONReconsideration Unit
References
0
Case No. ADJ7684235
Regular
Oct 18, 2011

ADELFO BERNARDO CARLOS vs. SHIRLEY M. COLEMAN and CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION; INTER-INSURANCE BUREAU C/O TRISTAR

The defendant sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted this petition to allow further study of the factual and legal issues. This ensures a complete understanding of the record before issuing a just and reasoned decision. All future filings must now be directed to the Office of the Commissioners.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGranting PetitionDecision After ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionOffice of the CommissionersSan FranciscoCalifornia
References
0
Case No. EUR 31005 EUR 31006 EUR 31007
Regular
Jun 17, 2008

WAYNE E. LOVEL, JR. vs. JIM BAKER TRUCKING, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision to allow further study of factual and legal issues. This action is necessary to ensure a complete understanding of the record and enable a just decision. All future communications related to this case must now be directed to the Reconsideration Unit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJim Baker TruckingLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyCase No. EUR 31005EUR 31006EUR 31007EUR District OfficeStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issues
References
0
Case No. GRO 0033694
Regular
Dec 21, 2007

MICHAEL CEDILLOS vs. WALGREENS, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

Both applicant Michael Cedillos and defendant Walgreens, through Sedgwick Claims Management Services, petitioned for reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration for both parties to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues. This action is necessary to ensure a complete understanding of the record and to issue a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and OrderStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issuesJust and reasoned decisionFurther proceedingsReconsideration UnitDecision After ReconsiderationService by mail
References
0
Case No. ADJ2331238 (BAK 0137358) ADJ2292565 (BAK 0131673)
Regular
Jan 31, 2012

STEPHEN BROWN vs. NABORS INDUSTRIES, LIBERTY MUTUAL, CNA

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendant Nabors Industries, Liberty Mutual, and CNA. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition because they need more time to thoroughly review the factual and legal issues presented. This reconsideration is necessary to ensure a just and reasoned decision after a complete understanding of the record.

Petition for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionFurther ProceedingsDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersSan Francisco
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 4,535 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