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. CV-23-2160, CV-24-0333
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 13, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Cynthia Goss

Cynthia Goss, a crisis response services provider, sought workers' compensation benefits for sarcoidosis sustained from exposure at the World Trade Center (WTC) site as a volunteer in October and December 2001. Initially, a WCLJ established her claim under Workers' Compensation Law article 8-A, finding her activities covered. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, concluding she was not a "participant" in WTC rescue, recovery, and cleanup operations. The Appellate Division found the Board's determination unsupported by substantial evidence, noting Goss's direct connection to the NYPD command center and her role in providing mental health support to first responders at the site. The court emphasized the liberal construction intended for Workers' Compensation Law article 8-A and reversed the Board's decisions, remitting the matter for further proceedings.

WTC ClaimsVolunteer BenefitsSarcoidosisWorkers' Compensation AppealsWorld Trade Center RescueRecoveryCleanup OperationsMental Health SupportFirst RespondersAppellate Division
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Shenendehowa Central School District Board of Education & Civil Service Employees Ass'n

Kavanagh, J., in a dissenting opinion, argues against the majority's decision to confirm an arbitration award. The dissent contends that the petitioner (employer) had a contractual right under the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) to terminate respondent Cynthia DiDomenicantonio for failing a drug test. The arbitrator, in the dissenting view, exceeded his authority by imposing additional 'just cause' requirements not stipulated in the CBA, effectively changing the agreement and reaching a resolution outside the scope of arbitration. The dissent further highlights public policy concerns regarding the safety implications of school bus drivers who are substance abusers.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementDrug TestingEmployee TerminationArbitrator AuthorityPublic PolicySchool Bus DriversMisconductContractual RightsAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. ADJ1468445 (AHM 0109357)
Regular
Jun 08, 2009

CYNTHIA MAYFIELD vs. VERIZON, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has denied Cynthia Mayfield's Petition for Removal. The Board adopted the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) as the basis for their decision. Therefore, the petition to remove the case from its current status has been denied.

Petition for RemovalDeniedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportADJ1468445Cynthia MayfieldVerizonSedgwick CMSadministrative law judgedeny removal
References
0
Case No. ADJ8110093
Regular
May 03, 2018

CYNTHIA WESLEY vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case concerns applicant Cynthia Wesley's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board denied her petition, upholding the original award of 8% permanent disability for a spine and hip injury sustained while employed as a probation officer. The original award included apportionment to a prior disability award. Wesley argued the WCJ erred in rating her disability and in applying apportionment. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding no grounds for reconsideration of the original award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardindustrial injuryspineright hippermanent disabilityapportionmentLabor Code section 4664prior award
References
1
Case No. ADJ10939915
Regular
Jul 27, 2017

CYNTHIA MCDANIEL vs. TIMEC/BROADSPECTRUM, ESIS/INA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Cynthia McDaniel's petition for reconsideration because it was filed against an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision on substantive rights or liabilities. However, the WCAB granted her petition for removal. The WCAB rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This action was based on the WCJ's own report, which the WCAB adopted and incorporated.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory ProceduralEvidentiary IssueRescinded DecisionFurther ProceedingsWCJ Report
References
4
Case No. ADJ9477887
Regular
Oct 29, 2025

Cynthia Hargerty vs. HealthNet, Inc.; Safety National Insurance

Applicant Cynthia Hargerty, a substance abuse counselor, sustained injuries in 2013 and settled her case for 27% permanent disability in 2018. She later petitioned to reopen, asserting her psychiatric injury was compensable under Labor Code section 4660.1(c) and that vocational reporting indicated total disability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's December 23, 2021 F&O, stating the prior finding on psychiatric injury non-compensability was final due to lack of appeal. The Board also deemed the vocational expert's opinion insufficient as it relied on psychiatric impairment statutorily barred and inadequately addressed non-industrial apportionment factors.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCynthia HargertyHealthnet Inc.Safety National InsuranceADJ9477887Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationPetition to ReopenScheduled RatingLabor Code Section 4660.1(c)Permanent Total Disability
References
8
Case No. LAO 831546
Regular
Jul 30, 2007

CYNTHIA WINCHESTER vs. TENET/USC UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, C/O SRS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Cynthia Winchester's petition for reconsideration in Case No. LAO 831546. The Board adopted the WCJ's report for denial, but ordered further proceedings on the defendant's petition to set aside the order approving compromise and release. These proceedings will commence upon return of the file to the trial level without further action by the parties.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDenying ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJ reportPetition to set asideCompromise and ReleaseTrial level proceedingsOfficial Address RecordService by Mail
References
0
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04692 [140 AD3d 922]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 15, 2016

Franklin v. Hafftka

Cynthia Franklin, acting as special guardian for George S. Franklin, commenced an action against Michael and Yonat Hafftka, asserting claims including breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty related to a joint residential property purchase and shared living arrangement. George S. Franklin, who had a history of mental illness, had entered into this agreement with the Hafftka defendants. The defendants sought to dismiss several causes of action as time-barred or for failing to state a cause of action, while the plaintiff cross-moved for leave to amend certain claims. The Supreme Court initially granted the dismissal of some causes of action and denied the cross-motion to amend. The Appellate Division modified this order, ruling that the defendants' motion to dismiss the first, third, fourth, fifth, and sixteenth causes of action, and parts of the sixth, seventh, and eighth causes of action as time-barred, should have been denied due to a question of fact regarding the application of fiduciary tolling or the "repudiation rule." The court affirmed the dismissal of the ninth cause of action for promissory estoppel and the eleventh for a purchase money resulting trust. Additionally, the Appellate Division granted the plaintiff leave to amend the fifth cause of action but denied amendment for the sixth and seventh causes of action.

Breach of ContractBreach of Fiduciary DutyAiding and AbettingStatute of LimitationsFiduciary Tolling RuleRepudiation RulePromissory EstoppelPurchase Money Resulting TrustMotion to DismissLeave to Amend
References
14
Case No. ADJ8569965
Regular
Jun 22, 2016

CYNTHIA HOPKINS vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SF MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Cynthia Hopkins' petition for reconsideration of the dismissal of her Labor Code 132a discrimination claim. While Hopkins argued her discrimination claim related back to an earlier workers' compensation filing, the WCJ found it untimely. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations, thus denying reconsideration. However, the WCAB clarified that Hopkins' petition for reconsideration itself was timely filed within the statutory period.

Labor Code 132adiscrimination claimworkers' compensationPetition for ReconsiderationWCJstatute of limitationsuntimely filingrelates backSupplemental BriefAppeals Board
References
6
Case No. ADJ9412815
Regular
Jul 07, 2015

CYNTHIA CRAWFORD vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant, Cynthia Crawford, regarding a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board has granted the petition for reconsideration. This decision allows for further review of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned outcome. All future filings related to this petition must be submitted directly to the Appeals Board Commissioners, not to the district office.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationADJ9412815Oakland District OfficeOpinion and OrderStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionOffice of the CommissionersSan Francisco
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 71 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