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 the Adoption of Doe

In a proceeding to vacate an adoption, respondent ERJ moved to close the courtroom during a hearing on Cambodian law, arguing that media exposure regarding her adopted four-year-old son, John Doe, could cause emotional harm. Movant LMB opposed the motion. Justice Kristin Booth Glen denied the application for courtroom closure, emphasizing the strong constitutional and statutory presumption of public trials, which ERJ's speculative claims of harm and a hypothetical expert affidavit failed to overcome. The court further noted the significant public interest in the case, particularly concerning Cambodian adoption certificates and US government policy. While upholding the sealing of adoption-related documents, the court denied sealing the trial transcript and its decisions, affirming the principle of open court records.

Adoption disputeCourt transparencyChild protectionInternational lawParental rightsMedia accessJudicial precedentFamily lawNew York courtsExpert testimony
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2005

United States v. DiPietro

During jury selection for a multi-defendant case, defendant Nicola Murdocca, who is undergoing chemotherapy for lung cancer, suffered a dramatic medical collapse in the courtroom. This incident, involving audible moaning, foaming at the mouth, and Murdocca yelling about his cancer, caused pandemonium and drew attention from jurors, other defendants, and defense counsel. Paramedics were called, and Murdocca was later discharged from the hospital after being treated for dizziness. The Government requested a new jury selection, citing contamination. The Court granted Murdocca's severance application on medical grounds and dismissed the existing jury pool, deeming them unable to be impartial due to the traumatic events and certain courtroom interactions.

Jury selectionMistrialDefendant illnessSeveranceJury impartialityCourtroom incidentChemotherapyLung cancerDue processJudicial discretion
References
4
Case No. ADJ246218 (ANA 0286638)
Regular
Jun 27, 2012

PAUL LIGAMMARI vs. LOS ANGELES COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTIC, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

The applicant's petition, treated as a Petition for Disqualification, was denied as untimely or without merit. The Appeals Board is initiating removal of the matter to consider sanctions against the applicant for using insulting and disrespectful language that impugns the integrity of the WCAB and its judges. The applicant's prior admonishment for similar conduct underscores the Board's intent to enforce decorum.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationPetition for RemovalJudge LembergSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Appeals Board Rule 10561Bad FaithFrivolous TacticsPrejudicial Language
References
15
Case No. ADJ4467882 (LAO 0859165)
Regular
Jul 05, 2012

YOLANDA HERNANDEZ vs. ARAMARK UNIFORM \& CAREER APPAREL, SPECIALTY RISK

This order denies the Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) adopted and incorporated the findings of the administrative law judge. The Board also issued a warning to Ana Montes regarding repeated courtroom misconduct and failure to follow WCAB rules, threatening suspension of her right to appear. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration is denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationDENYsanctionedinappropriate conductWCAB rulesLabor Code section 4907suspend right to appearprofessional mannerADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2012

In re Alesha P.

This case concerns an appeal from a Family Court order that found respondent Michael B. sexually abused his two stepdaughters. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, concluding that its findings of sexual abuse were supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The respondent's contention regarding his exclusion from the courtroom during his stepdaughters' testimony was also rejected. The court determined that the exclusion was proper to prevent substantial emotional trauma to the stepdaughters and was based on a social worker's affidavit.

Sexual AbuseChild AbuseFamily CourtFact-Finding OrderAppealPreponderance of EvidenceWitness ExclusionEmotional TraumaCredibility AssessmentStepdaughters
References
8
Case No. ADJ7671309
Regular
Jul 28, 2014

ISRAEL SALAZAR vs. HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration after their lien was dismissed with prejudice for failing to appear at a scheduled lien conference. The lien claimant's representative claimed the non-appearance was due to a calendaring error, believing the appearance was at 1:30 PM instead of in the morning. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition. The WCAB found that the representative's explanation did not constitute good cause and that his mere presence in the courtroom for other matters did not constitute an appearance for this specific conference.

WCABLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalNon-AppearanceLien ConferenceGood CauseExcusable NeglectWCJOrder Dismissing
References
0
Case No. ADJ6906376
Regular
Apr 02, 2012

MICHELLE WALKER vs. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES; Permissibly Self-Insured, c/o BROADSPIRE SERVICES

This case involves a workers' compensation trial that was taken off calendar by the WCJ due to the applicant's and defendant's attorneys arriving late and failing to have exhibits prepared, and subsequently not returning to the courtroom as ordered. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding that taking the case off calendar was prejudicial to the applicant and a waste of court resources. The Board rescinded the WCJ's order and returned the case for a new trial, while noting that the attorneys' conduct and the defendant's misrepresentation of facts were unacceptable and could lead to sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalOff Calendar OrderWCJHearing RepresentativeExhibitsSanctionsContempt ProceedingsMisrepresentationRescinded Order
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 01, 1987

People v. Gaines

The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed a judgment convicting the defendant of third-degree robbery. The defendant had entered a grocery store, threatened the cashier with what appeared to be a hand grenade, and claimed to have committed a homicide, stealing $15 before fleeing. He was later apprehended, and the inoperable grenade was recovered. The court ruled that the homicide threat merely enhanced the seriousness of the robbery threat, not constituting evidence of an uncharged crime. Additionally, the defendant's claim regarding courtroom closure during summation was not preserved for appellate review.

RobberyThird Degree RobberySecond Felony OffenderHand Grenade ThreatUncharged Crime EvidenceAppellate ReviewCourtroom ClosureCriminal Procedure LawAffirmance
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Newcombe v. Regan

This proceeding, transferred from Supreme Court, Albany County, reviews a determination by the respondent to deny the petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement benefits. The court found that the petitioner's arm injury, sustained while closing a courtroom window, resulted from physical exertion during regular duties and thus did not constitute an 'accident' under Retirement and Social Security Law § 63. Citing precedents, the court affirmed that such an injury, if part of customary tasks, does not qualify for accidental disability benefits. The determination by the respondent was deemed supported by substantial evidence. Furthermore, the court noted that any classification of the incident as an accident under Workers’ Compensation Law would not be binding on the respondent.

Accidental disability retirementCPLR Article 78Regular dutiesPhysical exertion injuryAdministrative determination reviewSubstantial evidenceRetirement and Social Security Law § 63Workers' Compensation Law distinctionCourtroom window incidentBenefits denial
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Robert U.

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order that adjudicated the respondent's children and stepchildren as abused and/or neglected. The respondent argued that his due process rights were violated due to his exclusion from the courtroom during the testimony of the child victims and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court found that while the Family Court did not explicitly balance the respondent's due process rights against the children's well-being, this error did not necessitate reversal because a prima facie case of abuse was established by other evidence, making the child victims' testimony non-essential for that purpose. Additionally, the court dismissed the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, noting counsel's presence during testimony and a provided adjournment. Consequently, the original Family Court order was affirmed.

Child abuseChild neglectDue processRight to counselEffective assistance of counselExclusion of partyWitness traumaFamily Court ActAppellate reviewPrima facie case
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 10 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