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. ADJ1717969 (VNO 0449705)
Regular
Mar 20, 2013

ERIKA ROLLINS vs. FILM PAYMENT SERVICES, KID BROTHERS PRODUCTION, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for LEGION, in liquidation, ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded an arbitrator's award because the arbitration proceedings lacked a proper record, violating Labor Code sections requiring findings on all facts and compliance with case record standards. The WCAB returned the matter for further proceedings to ensure a complete record is created, adhering to due process principles and established case law. If a compliant record cannot be created, the case will be remanded for a new arbitrator selection. The parties sought reconsideration of the original award, which found Travelers' insurance to be "other insurance" and held them liable for the applicant's injury, ordering CIGA's dismissal.

California Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGASt. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance CompanyTravelersWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardArbitrator's AwardReconsiderationOther InsuranceInsurance Code Section 1063.1(c)(9)Prejudgment Interest
References
3
Case No. ADJ13111007
Regular
Oct 13, 2025

CHARLES MISERENDINO vs. CLUB DEMONSTRATION SERVICES, INC.; QBE SPECIALTY INSURANCE

Applicant filed a petition for removal from an order taking the matter off calendar, issued on September 10, 2024, by the WCJ. Applicant contended that the issue of additional panels was ripe for adjudication. The Appeals Board granted removal, finding that the WCJ's order violated due process by being issued without creating a record or explaining the need for further development, thus constituting irreparable harm. Consequently, the Board rescinded the September 10, 2024 order and returned the matter to the trial level to create a record, refraining from making a judgment on the warrant for additional panels without a formal record.

Petition for RemovalOrder Taking Matter Off CalendarAdjudicationDue Process ViolationIrreparable HarmSubstantial PrejudiceWCJ ReportRescind OrderReturn to Trial LevelCreate Record
References
6
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. 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. SBR 0339154
Regular
May 05, 2008

KEPHA SHARP vs. STATER BROS MARKET, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded an order that allowed the applicant to rescind a settlement if they repaid the funds within five years. The WCAB found that no adequate record was created during the previous proceedings, making meaningful review impossible. Therefore, the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including a proper adequacy hearing, to create a complete record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCompromise and ReleaseOrder of RestitutionOrder VacatingPetition for ReconsiderationAdequacy ConferenceReinstatementDue ProcessLabor Code Section 5813Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation
References
1
Case No. ADJ2728426 (OAK 0268124)
Regular
Jul 05, 2016

ANTONIA GUZMAN, vs. ROTH STAFFING; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL INS. CO, In Liquidation; IKEA; TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded an arbitrator's order changing the administrator of a claim. The original order found Travelers' policy constituted "other insurance," relieved CIGA of liability, and required Travelers to administer the claim, but the Board found the arbitrator failed to create a sufficient record. Specifically, essential preliminary facts regarding employment, insurance coverage, and the nature of Travelers' coverage were not established. The case is returned to the arbitrator to create a proper record and adjudicate the issues, including the doctrine of laches, based on substantial evidence.

CIGALachesInsurance Code Section 1063.1Order Changing AdministratorReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5313ArbitrationRecord CreationThreshold IssueAOE/COE
References
8
Case No. ADJ18157692
Regular
Oct 22, 2025

ROLANDO GARCIA vs. HOLLENBECK PALMS, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

Applicant filed a petition for removal from an order taking the matter off calendar, contending that the issue of striking the qualified medical evaluator (QME) was ripe for adjudication. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal, finding that the WCJ's order violated due process by being issued without creating a record or explaining the need for further development. As a decision after removal, the WCAB rescinded the August 12, 2025 order and returned the matter to the trial level to create a proper record, emphasizing the due process rights of all parties, including the QME, in such proceedings.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Striking QMEAdmissibility of ReportsLabor Code Section 4628Due ProcessIrreparable HarmSubstantial PrejudiceMedical-Legal ExpensesPhysician's Liability
References
26
Case No. ADJ15400555
Regular
Oct 10, 2025

MA LUISA OLIVARES vs. WINDSOR PALMS CARE CENTER, STARSTONE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CANNON COCHRAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

Defendant filed a petition for removal against a workers' compensation administrative law judge's (WCJ) orders from May 9, 2024, which took the matter off calendar and appeared to consolidate cases. The Appeals Board determined that the WCJ's orders, issued without creating a proper record or providing adequate notice for consolidation, constituted irreparable harm and violated the parties' right to due process. Consequently, the Board granted the petition for removal and rescinded the May 9, 2024 Minute Orders. The case was then returned to the trial level for further proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of creating a proper record to support any future orders.

Petition for RemovalOrder Taking Matter Off CalendarConsolidationDiscoveryDue Process ViolationIrreparable HarmSubstantial EvidenceRecord DevelopmentNotice and Opportunity to be HeardOrder of Consolidation
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 03, 2004

Ulloa v. Universal Music and Video Distribution Corp.

Plaintiff Demme Ulloa initiated legal action against Universal Music and Video Distribution Corp., Island Def Jam Music Group, Roc-A-Fella Records, LLC, and Shawn Carter, alleging copyright infringement, false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, unjust enrichment, joint authorship, and an accounting of sales. Ulloa claimed to have spontaneously created a vocal counter-melody for Shawn Carter's song "Izzo (H.O.V.A.)" which was later used without proper credit or compensation. The Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the claims of joint authorship and Lanham Act violations, dismissing them. However, it denied both parties' motions for summary judgment regarding copyright infringement, citing unresolved factual disputes concerning originality, work-for-hire status, and implied license. Additionally, the defendants' motions to dismiss the unjust enrichment claim and to bifurcate the trial were denied.

Copyright InfringementLanham ActUnjust EnrichmentJoint AuthorshipSummary JudgmentWork for HireImplied LicenseMusical CompositionSound RecordingOriginality
References
31
Showing 1-10 of 4,619 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