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. ADJ4306808 (AHM 0061728)
Regular
Dec 17, 2012

DEBRA CRAWFORD vs. GUIDANT CORPORATION, ONE BEACON INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied One Beacon Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration regarding applicant Debra Crawford's cumulative injury. The Board affirmed the earlier decision establishing August 22, 1996, as the date of injury, which shifts liability from CIGA to One Beacon. The Board found sufficient evidence to support the August 22, 1996 date, despite One Beacon's arguments. Finally, the Board upheld the finding of permanent total disability, relying on persuasive medical opinions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDate of InjuryLabor Code Section 5412Cumulative InjuryBilateral Upper ExtremitiesNeck InjuryPermanent Total DisabilityOne Beacon Insurance CompanyCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Crawford v. Antonacci

Plaintiff James Crawford and his wife commenced a negligence action after James Crawford suffered a torn rotator cuff due to a fall on defendants' property on November 22, 2000. The plaintiffs sought to disqualify the defendants' law firm, Hinman, Howard & Kattell (HH&K), arguing a conflict of interest due to HH&K previously representing James Crawford in a workers' compensation claim for a back injury in 1987. The Supreme Court denied the disqualification motion. On appeal, the court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, ruling that the prior workers' compensation matter and the current negligence action were not "substantially related" under disciplinary rules, as the injuries were different, occurred 13 years apart, and any shared "loss of enjoyment of life" component was deemed speculative without specific impact descriptions. The court noted that all information regarding the prior injury would be discoverable regardless of legal representation.

Attorney DisqualificationConflict of InterestPrior RepresentationSubstantially Related MattersWorkers' Compensation ClaimNegligence ActionRotator Cuff InjuryBack InjuryDisciplinary RulesAppellate Affirmation
References
1
Case No. CA 10-00545
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2011

HAHN AUTOMOTIVE WAREHOUSE, INC. v. AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

Hahn Automotive Warehouse, Inc. (plaintiff) initiated a breach of contract action against American Zurich Insurance Company and Zurich American Insurance Company (defendants), contending that bills issued under insurance contracts were time-barred. Defendants counterclaimed for damages stemming from plaintiff's alleged breach of these contracts. The Supreme Court partially granted plaintiff's cross-motion, deeming counterclaims for debts arising over six years prior as time-barred. Concurrently, it permitted defendants to utilize a $400,000 letter of credit to satisfy any outstanding debt, including those deemed time-barred. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the use of the letter of credit for time-barred debts, reasoning that the statute of limitations only bars the remedy, not the underlying obligation. The court also affirmed that defendants' counterclaims for debts over six years old were time-barred, as the right to demand payment accrued earlier. Finally, the court modified the order to dismiss plaintiff's second through fourth causes of action. A dissenting opinion argued that the counterclaims were not time-barred, asserting that the cause of action accrued upon demand and refusal of payment, not merely when the right to demand payment existed.

Breach of contractInsurance contractsStatute of limitationsLetter of creditSummary judgmentAppellate reviewContract interpretationTime-barred claimsAccrual of cause of actionRetrospective premiums
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hakim v. Armstrong Rubber Co.

Joseph Hakim initiated a negligence action seeking damages for personal injuries after a forklift tire he was changing exploded. He alleged that Armstrong Rubber Company negligently designed and manufactured the tire, Firestone Tire & Rubber Company negligently designed and manufactured the wheel rim, and Clark Equipment Company negligently manufactured and failed to inspect the forklift. Armstrong and Firestone successfully moved for summary judgment by presenting evidence that they did not manufacture the specific tire or rim involved, which Hakim failed to rebut with sufficient evidence. Conversely, Clark Equipment Company's motion for summary judgment was denied due to its failure to provide any evidence disproving its involvement in the forklift's manufacture or inspection.

Forklift accidentTire explosionProduct liabilitySummary judgmentNegligenceManufacturing defectDesign defectInspection failureHearsay evidencePrima facie case
References
2
Case No. ADJ937954 (POM 0254711)
Regular
Aug 18, 2010

ANGELITA (ANGIE) FERNANDEZ vs. OAK TREE RACING ASSOCIATION, LOS ANGELES TURF CLUB, CADDIE SERVICES, INCORPORATED, CIGA by its servicing agent CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES for LEGION INSURANCE, in liquidation, CRAWFORD & COMPANY on behalf of ZURICH INSURANCE

This case involved an applicant claiming industrial injury to her shoulders and upper extremities. A prior insurer, Legion Insurance, erroneously paid benefits through its administrator, REM, before its insolvency. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the arbitrator's decision, which held Zurich Insurance (adjusted by Crawford & Company) liable for reimbursement to CIGA. This is because Zurich provided "other insurance" for a portion of the cumulative trauma injury, making it solely responsible for benefits where both an insolvent and solvent insurer would be liable. The Board found CIGA could recover pre-insolvency and mistaken payments, and Zurich's due process claims were unpersuasive.

CIGAZurich InsuranceCrawford & CompanyOak Tree Racing AssociationLegion InsuranceFremont Indemnitycumulative traumainsolvent insurersolvent insurerreimbursement
References
8
Case No. LAO 0815296, LAO 0815298
Regular
Jul 29, 2008

MARIA LIEVANOS vs. GOLDEN STATE FOODS, BROADSPIRE (CRAWFORD & COMPANY) CNA/RSKCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, reversing a prior decision that found Crawford's petition for contribution untimely. The WCAB determined that the parties' Compromise and Release (C&R) agreement, specifically paragraph 14, constituted a final judgment of contribution between Crawford and RSKCo, setting forth their respective liabilities. Therefore, the WCAB held that Labor Code section 5500.5(e) did not bar Crawford's claim for reimbursement as the C&R itself provided the basis for contribution.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ContributionTimelinessStatute of LimitationsCompromise and Release (C&R)Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR)Apportionment of LiabilityDeclaratory JudgmentContinuing JurisdictionLabor Code Section 5500.5(e)
References
3
Case No. ADJ1168599 (WCK 0050522)
Regular
Mar 05, 2009

STANLEY ANGEL (Deceased) WANDA ANGEL (Widow) vs. DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, CRAWFORD & COMPANY, TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a prior finding that Stanley Angel's death from multiple myeloma was industrially caused by chemical exposure at Dow Chemical Company. The Board found insufficient evidence of sufficient exposure levels and duration to establish industrial causation. Medical opinions were split, but the Board found the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof for a causal connection. Consequently, the applicant received no further benefits.

Multiple MyelomaToxic Chemical ExposureIndustrial CausationQualified Medical EvaluatorLatency PeriodOrganic SolventsCumulative TraumaIndustrial InjuryWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Homestead Village Assoc., L.P. v. Diamond State Insurance

Plaintiff Homestead Village Associates, LP sued its insurers, Diamond State Insurance Company and Chubb Insurance Company of New Jersey, seeking a declaratory judgment regarding their duty to defend and indemnify Homestead in a personal injury action. Homestead also sued its insurance broker, Capacity Coverage Company of New Jersey, for breach of contract and negligence due to late notification of the accident. All parties cross-moved for summary judgment. The court granted Diamond's motion, finding Homestead's 16-month delay in notification unreasonable. Chubb's motion was granted in part and denied in part, as the court found late notice from Homestead, but a factual dispute remained regarding Chubb's timely disclaimer. The court also clarified that Chubb's excess policy would not 'drop down' to cover primary obligations and it had no duty to defend. Homestead's and Capacity's cross-motions for summary judgment were denied, with factual disputes remaining regarding a special relationship and Capacity's knowledge of the accident's seriousness.

Insurance Coverage DisputeDeclaratory JudgmentSummary Judgment MotionLate Notice DefenseExcess Insurance PolicyInsurance Broker LiabilityBreach of ContractNegligence ClaimChoice of LawNew York Insurance Law
References
41
Case No. ADJ1168599
Regular
May 29, 2009

STANLEY ANGEL (Deceased) WANDA ANGEL (Widow) vs. DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, CRAWFORD & COMPANY, TRAVELERS

This case concerns a widow's petition for reconsideration of a denial of death benefits for her husband, Stanley Angel, who died of multiple myeloma. The Appeals Board previously ruled that there was insufficient substantial medical evidence to establish that Mr. Angel's exposure to toxic chemicals during his employment with Dow Chemical Company caused his illness. The widow argued the Board erred in disregarding the opinion of her Qualified Medical Evaluator, Dr. Harrison, and misapplied the burden of proof. However, the Board affirmed its prior decision, finding Dr. Harrison's revised opinion lacked a solid basis and was inconsistent with other evidence regarding the extent and duration of exposure.

Multiple MyelomaIndustrial InjuryToxic Chemical ExposureQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Medical CausationLatency PeriodSubstantial Medical EvidenceBurden of ProofReconsiderationOccupational Medicine
References
7
Case No. ADJ1526910 (LAO 0881311) ADJ1183697 (LAO 0881312)
Regular
Apr 14, 2017

MARGARITA GIUSTRA vs. PRIMARY PROVIDER MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL LIABILITY AND FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, DELOS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Delos Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the arbitrator's report, which found that a prior Compromise and Release agreement between the applicant and Delos Insurance Company only settled a specific injury, not the continuous trauma claim. This decision allowed National Liability and Fire Insurance Company's petition for contribution against Delos Insurance Company for a portion of benefits paid for the continuous trauma injury. The arbitrator also determined that prior conflicting judicial decisions did not bar Delos Insurance Company from being joined in the contribution proceedings.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardMargarita GiustraPrimary Provider ManagementNational Liability and Fire Insurance CompanyDelos Insurance CompanyADJ1526910ADJ1183697Petition for ReconsiderationArbitrator's ReportCompromise and Release
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 7,770 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