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
Feb 22, 1994

St. Lawrence County Department of Social Services v. Terry E.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Family Court of St. Lawrence County, which adjudicated the respondent as the father of a child born to Julie D. An earlier paternity proceeding had excluded Richard M. as the father. The mother, Julie D., testified to having unprotected sexual relations with the respondent during the critical period of conception. Blood tests, including HLA and DNA analyses, indicated a high probability of the respondent's paternity. The respondent presented testimony from several witnesses attempting to cast doubt on the mother's claims and her credibility regarding other potential fathers. However, the Family Court found the mother's testimony credible and struck the testimony of the respondent's brother due to a lack of corroboration. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's determination, concluding that the evidence, particularly the mother's credible testimony and the highly probative blood test results, amply supported the paternity finding. The court also found no merit to the respondent's contention of ineffective assistance of counsel.

PaternityChild AdjudicationBlood Genetic Marker TestHLA TestDNA AnalysisCredibility AssessmentWitness TestimonyFamily LawAppellate ReviewSexual History
References
8
Case No. ADJ6688237
Regular
Jun 10, 2013

Celina Acevedo vs. William Sanchez-Barrera, UEF

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision that found applicant Celina Acevedo was not an employee of William Sanchez-Barrera. The Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) credibility finding against the applicant was central to the decision. The ALJ found the applicant's testimony regarding her employment and the severity of her claimed injury lacked credibility, while the defense witness's testimony was deemed credible. Therefore, the board adopted the ALJ's report and recommendations.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCredibility FindingEmployment RelationshipHousekeeperInjury AOE/COEWitness TestimonyEmployment RecordsApplicant Credibility
References
1
Case No. ADJ7820610
Regular
Dec 12, 2012

CRISTINA SANCHEZ vs. MOLA SEWING, INC., REPUBLIC INDEMNITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Cristina Sanchez's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding that she failed to meet her burden of proof. The WCJ found the applicant's testimony lacked credibility, citing inconsistencies with her deposition testimony and credible witness accounts. Specifically, the applicant's claims regarding heavy lifting, reporting injuries, and the cause of her inability to work were contradicted by evidence. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, as is customary.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DenialAdministrative Law Judge ReportCredibility FindingGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.In Pro PerPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderBurden of ProofCourse of Employment
References
1
Case No. ADJ6586259
Regular
May 17, 2010

Ramon Navarro vs. Landscape Specialists, Inc./Artistic Maintenance Landscaping, Inc., IWC Group

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a decision that found he did not prove a work-related injury. The applicant's testimony regarding the time, location, and manner of his alleged injury was inconsistent and contradicted by his phone records and the credible testimony of a defense witness. The Administrative Law Judge found the applicant not credible, and the Board affirmed this finding, stating the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board specifically gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationCredibilityGeneral LaborerGardenerBack InjuryLeft Lower Extremity InjurySleep DisorderSexual DysfunctionImpeachment
References
2
Case No. ADJ6950787
Regular
Jun 22, 2012

JOSE BARRIENTOS vs. MARK GREENBERG, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued the administrative law judge (WCJ) abused discretion by finding the applicant credible, specifically regarding the duration of employment to exclude him from employee status under Labor Code §3352(h). The WCJ adopted the report recommending denial, emphasizing applicant's credible testimony regarding hours worked and pay, and finding the defendant's testimony less reliable due to a lack of direct knowledge. The Board extended great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, affirming the denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility findingLabor Code §3352(h)employee definitionconflicting testimonyobservational demeanorunreliable testimonyunrebutted testimony
References
1
Case No. ADJ8414182
Regular
Feb 25, 2014

VICTOR LEDESMA, (VICTOR GOMEZ LEDESMA) vs. GROUP MANUFACTURING SERVICES, HANOVER INSURANCE GROUP

This case involves a workers' compensation claim for a left ankle and foot injury. The defendant sought reconsideration of the decision, arguing the applicant's testimony was less credible, the claim was barred as post-termination, exhibits were improperly admitted, and a defense witness was wrongly excluded. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the judge's report. The judge found the applicant's testimony credible, noting inconsistencies and misrepresentations in the defendant's arguments and witness testimonies. Specifically, the judge determined the termination date was not a bar, the admission of exhibits was proper, and the exclusion of the unlisted rebuttal witness was warranted.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.denial of reconsiderationoccupational injuryleft ankle and footdeburrerdenied claim
References
2
Case No. ADJ7430217
Regular
May 17, 2012

LETICIA FLORES vs. RABOBANK; CHUBB GROUP OF INSURANCE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the applicant's claim for injuries sustained from continuous trauma at Rabobank. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found the applicant's orthopedic injuries arose out of and in the course of employment, relying heavily on the credible testimony of the applicant and the persuasive report of the Agreed Medical Examiner. Despite the defendant's arguments regarding lack of prior medical complaints and other activities, the WCJ found the applicant's testimony credible and the Agreed Medical Examiner's findings sufficient to support an award of temporary disability benefits. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings, extending great weight to the credibility determination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerInjury AOE/COEContinuous TraumaTemporary DisabilityCredibility FindingLabor Code Section 3202.5Liberal ConstructionPreponderance of Evidence
References
6
Case No. ADJ8442050
Regular
Dec 18, 2014

RAMON SANTIAGO vs. GRIFFITH COMPANY, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE GROUP

The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision finding no industrial injury to his spine. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the original decision. The Board deferred to the administrative law judge's credibility findings, which found the applicant's testimony unreliable and non-credible. Conversely, the defense witnesses' testimony was deemed reliable and consistent, supporting the denial of the claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderWCJindustrial injurylumbar spinethoracic spinecompensable presumptionnotice requirementscredibility determination
References
2
Case No. ADJ7474522
Regular
Dec 29, 2011

ANTOIAN GRIFFIN vs. HENKELS & McCOY, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICAN

This case involves a workers' compensation claim for a back injury. The applicant's credibility was questioned due to inconsistencies in his testimony and prior undisclosed injuries. The Administrative Law Judge found the applicant's testimony lacked credibility and was unsupported by the medical record. Consequently, the applicant did not meet his burden of proof, and the Appeals Board denied his petition for reconsideration, upholding the judge's decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.AOE/COEindustrial injuryday laborertruck driver's licenseprior work injuries
References
1
Case No. ADJ3005224 (STK 0185309)
Regular
Jul 02, 2010

MARIO GONZALEZ vs. STANLEY VANDERVEEN/VMV HULLING LLC, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an applicant's petition. The applicant sought to establish employment with various entities or individuals after sustaining injuries from falling off a tractor. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found the applicant's testimony to be not credible and lacked substantial evidence of employment. The judge found the testimony of Stanley Vanderveen and David Corona to be more credible.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedWCJ ReportGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Applicant CredibilityEmployment StatusSubcontractorIndependent ContractorVMV Hulling LLC
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 3,355 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