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. ADJ8190120
Regular
Jan 27, 2015

DOROTHY WILLCOX vs. TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has issued an order dismissing the petition for reconsideration filed by Dorothy Willcox. This dismissal is due to the petitioner having formally withdrawn their reconsideration request. The original decision being reconsidered was issued on November 17, 2014, and the order of dismissal is dated January 27, 2015. The case involves a dispute between applicant Dorothy Willcox and defendant Tehachapi Unified School District.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedWithdrawnWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSelf-insuredADJ8190120Bakersfield District Office
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Estate of Wilson

Dorothy S. Wilson, as executrix of the estate of Leonard R. Wilson, filed a petition for discovery against Lee Ford concerning the proceeds of Leonard R. Wilson's retirement plan, which named Ford as the beneficiary. Mr. Wilson died in 1985, having a vested benefit in the Corporate Profit Sharing Plan and Trust Agreement for Cobblestone Enterprises, Inc. The court considered the 1984 amendments to ERISA requiring a qualified preretirement survivor annuity (QPSA) for surviving spouses. Despite the plan's amendment occurring after Mr. Wilson's death, a transition rule mandated the QPSA amendments be treated as in effect at the time of death. The court, citing no New York authority, concluded that given the Cobblestone plan was a 'defined benefit plan' and under the ERISA transition rule, Dorothy S. Wilson, as the surviving spouse, was entitled to the entire $8,643.38 proceeds of the retirement plan.

ERISARetirement PlanQualified Preretirement Survivor AnnuityQPSADefined Benefit PlanTransition RuleSurviving SpouseBeneficiary DisputeEstateProbate
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2015

Coleman v. New York City Transit Authority

This case involves an appeal regarding judgments entered after a jury trial against the New York City Transit Authority and Annie M. Canty. The Appellate Division, First Department, addressed two separate judgments for plaintiffs Diane Coleman and Dorothy Lemon. For Diane Coleman, the award for past pain and suffering was modified from $1.25 million to $1 million, with the rest affirmed. For Dorothy Lemon, the future lost earnings award was reduced from $728,000 to $520,000 over 25 years, while other awards for pain and suffering and past lost earnings were affirmed. The court also affirmed the trial court's evidentiary rulings, including the redaction of a social worker's statement from hospital records and the preclusion of expert testimony due to late disclosure.

Damages ReductionPain and Suffering AwardLost Earnings CalculationAppellate ReviewJury TrialEvidentiary RulingsExpert Witness PreclusionHospital Records AdmissibilityBiomechanical ExpertsAccident Reconstruction
References
11
Case No. ADJ4171489 (MON 0242389)
Regular
Apr 08, 2009

DOROTHY JESSEE vs. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Defendant sought reconsideration of a $100\%$ permanent disability award, arguing the judge erred in relying on the DEU rating specialist, an improperly appointed physician, and awarding psychiatric treatment without a psychiatric injury finding. Lien claimant Midas Recovery Services also sought reconsideration, as its lien for disability benefits was not addressed. The Appeals Board granted both petitions due to a severely disorganized case file that hampered review. Consequently, the original decision was rescinded, and the case was returned to the trial level for proper record preparation and a new decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDOROTHY JESSEETHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIASEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESpermanent disabilitycumulative industrial injuryfibromyalgiaDisability Evaluation Unitprivate rating witnessindependent medical evaluator
References
1
Case No. VNO 0056968
Regular
Jul 19, 2007

Dorothy Heckman vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Dorothy Heckman's petition for reconsideration of an order barring certain claims. The Board found that many of Heckman's claims were barred by *res judicata* or by Labor Code section 5814(g) due to being brought more than two years after payment was due. Furthermore, claims not yet decided by the WCJ were deemed premature for reconsideration.

Res JudicataLabor Code section 5814(g)WCJReconsiderationPenaltiesTreatment reimbursementsMedical expensesSelf-procured expensesPretrial settlement conferenceFindings and Award
References
1
Case No. ADJ514653 (SAC 0353041)
Regular
Mar 23, 2016

JULIE JESSEE vs. PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, HEALTHSOUTH CORP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Julie Jessee's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied her Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. The WCJ's report, which the WCAB adopted, indicated the decision at issue was an interlocutory procedural or evidentiary one. Therefore, both requests were denied as untimely and without sufficient grounds.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutoryProcedural DecisionEvidentiary DecisionExtraordinary RemedySubstantial Prejudice
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 24, 1994

Kowalski v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.

Plaintiffs Dorothy J. and Louis Kowalski, Jr. sued Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company for negligence and strict liability, alleging Mrs. Kowalski contracted bladder cancer from ortho-toluidine exposure via her husband's work clothes from Goodyear's Niagara Falls plant. Goodyear sought summary judgment, arguing the claim was time-barred, the strict liability claim was undefined, and no duty was owed to Mrs. Kowalski. The court denied Goodyear's motions, ruling that the federally required commencement date under CERCLA preempted the state statute of limitations. The court also found that plaintiffs adequately alleged Goodyear owed a duty of care due to the foreseeable harm from secondary exposure to a known dangerous substance, and that the strict liability claim required further evidence.

negligencestrict liabilitystatute of limitationsCERCLASARAhazardous substancestoxic exposurebladder canceroccupational diseasesecondary exposure
References
19
Case No. ADJ761271 (SJO 0070447)
Regular
Sep 22, 2010

Dorothy Thompson vs. GENERAL MOTORS, Permissibly SelfInsured, Adjusted by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has declared Dorothy Thompson a vexatious litigant. This declaration follows a notice issued on September 7, 2010, to which no response was received. As a result, any future filings by Ms. Thompson in propria persona will be considered "conditionally filed." Such filings will only be deemed properly filed after a judge or the Board determines they do not violate Rule 10782(a).

Vexatious LitigantPre-filing OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPropria PersonaRule 10782(a)Conditionally FiledPermissibly Self-InsuredSedgwick Claims Management ServicesNotice of IntentionPresiding Workers' Compensation Judge
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 02, 1994

Kern v. Frye Copysystems, Inc.

The case concerns William and Dorothy Kern's personal injury claims against Frye Copysystems, Inc. and Wheelabrator-Frye Co., stemming from an accident involving a rotary coating machine. The Kerns alleged negligence, breach of warranty, and strict products liability due to a defective design. The defendants sought summary judgment, arguing immunity under Worker's Compensation Law, that the warranty claim was time-barred, and that strict liability was inapplicable. The court granted summary judgment on the breach of warranty and strict products liability claims, but denied it for the negligence claim against Copysystems, citing unresolved factual disputes regarding machine modifications and successor liability under the "Billy" exception to Worker's Compensation exclusivity.

Personal InjuryProducts LiabilityNegligenceBreach of WarrantySummary JudgmentSuccessor LiabilityWorker's Compensation LawDefective DesignMachine AccidentStatute of Limitations
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Leary v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

Dorothy Leary, a part-time junior public health nurse for the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, injured her left knee after slipping on stairs due to wet shoes from snow outside. Her application for disability retirement benefits was denied by the Board of Trustees of the New York City Employees’ Retirement System, following a recommendation from the Medical Board that her injuries were not sustained as an 'accident' under Retirement and Social Security Law § 605. Leary challenged this determination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which the Supreme Court initially denied. However, the appellate court reversed this judgment, granted Leary's petition, annulled the Board's determination, and remitted the matter for further proceedings, concluding that her fall constituted an accident.

Workers' CompensationDisability RetirementPublic Health NurseSlip and Fall InjuryAccident DefinitionCPLR Article 78Medical Board ReviewAppellate ReversalRetirement and Social Security LawKings County Supreme Court
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 42 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