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. ADJ1337559 (SAC 0357559)
Regular
Dec 02, 2009

DARLENE FIESTE-RENDON, DARLENE FIESTE vs. DEPARTMENT FO CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Petition for Reconsideration of the decision issued on November 12, 2009, has been withdrawn by the petitioner. Therefore, it will be dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawn PetitionDismissal OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDarlene Fieste-RendonDepartment of CorrectionsState Compensation Insurance FundCCPOA Benefit Trust FundADJ1337559SAC 0357559
References
0
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 04040 [206 AD3d 945]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2022

Rendon v. Callaghan

The plaintiff, Vicente Rendon, sustained injuries after a garage roof he was repairing on premises owned by the defendant, Anna Callaghan, collapsed. Rendon filed a personal injury lawsuit, alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to Callaghan, ruling that she did not supervise the work and was protected by the homeowners' exemption under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed this decision, concluding that Callaghan had no notice of any structural defect for the Labor Law § 200 claim. The court further held that the homeowners' exemption applied because the garage served a residential purpose as an 'extension of the dwelling,' despite being on a separate lot, and Callaghan did not direct or control the plaintiff's work.

Personal injurySummary judgmentHomeowners' exemptionLabor LawRoof collapseDangerous conditionAppellate reviewResidential propertySupervisory controlLatent defect
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Darlene T.

The Family Court of Onondaga County adjudicated Darlene T. a neglected child due to the mother's unsafe conduct, including leaving the child unattended and entertaining male companions overnight. Following a dispositional hearing, the court remanded the child to the mother's custody under supervision and conditions. The petitioner appealed, arguing that the Family Court erred by not making an express finding regarding the child's best interests or the mother's fitness. The appellate court found the Family Court's order equivocal regarding the mother's fitness and erred in excluding testimony about the mother's post-petition conduct, which was relevant to her fitness. The order was reversed, and the matter remitted for further proceedings to include additional evidence and findings on the child's best interests.

Child neglectFamily lawCustodyParental rightsBest interests of the childAppellate reviewDispositional hearingEvidence exclusionMaternal fitnessAbuse of discretion
References
6
Case No. ADJ1337559
Regular
Dec 16, 2010

DARLENE FIESTE RENDON vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; SCIF STATE EMPLOYEES SACRAMENTO

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration filed by a lien claimant, BTF, seeking commutation of a worker's compensation award into a lump sum. The Appeals Board denied the petition, upholding the WCJ's decision that there was no legal basis for commutation. Specifically, the Board found that the conditions for commutation under Labor Code §5100, such as avoiding inequity or hardship to the applicant, were not met. While the applicant expressed a desire for payments to resume to address debts, her actions and objections indicated she did not seek commutation for her own best interest.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantBTFCommutationLabor Code §4903Labor Code §5100Permanent DisabilityStipulationsLiving Expenses
References
1
Case No. ADJ8185605
Regular
Oct 28, 2013

VERONICA RENDON vs. FULTON HOLDING CORP., SENTRY INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Veronica Rendon's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted and incorporated the administrative law judge's report, which found Rendon not to be a credible witness. This finding was based on numerous inconsistencies in her testimony regarding the alleged work injury and its reporting. Consequently, the Board upheld the judge's decision that Rendon failed to prove her injury arose out of and occurred in the course of employment.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationCredibilityInconsistenciesMedical HistoryWork InjuryEmployerWitness TestimonyCausationBurden of Proof
References
1
Case No. ADJ3928236 (SBR 0324409) ADJ3514825 (SBR 0332012)
Regular
Sep 10, 2009

DARLENE HALL vs. AMERICAN AIRLINES, SPECIALTY RISK DALLAS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended a prior order, deferring the issue of insurance coverage for Darlene Hall's 1976 back injury to mandatory arbitration as required by Labor Code section 5275(a)(1). The Board rescinded the dismissal of CNA Insurance as a party defendant, pending the arbitration outcome. All other issues raised by the defendant were affirmed based on the Judge's prior findings.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardJoint Findings and OrderReconsiderationSpecialty Risk ServicesAmerican AirlinesDarlene Hallflight attendantindustrial injuriesAgreed Medical ExaminerCNA Insurance
References
0
Case No. ADJ3301952 (POM 0298904) ADJ6774915 ADJ7102389
Regular
Jul 10, 2012

DARLENE ROWE vs. HACIENDA LA PUENTE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, INTERCARE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Darlene Rowe's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding that she did not sustain industrial injury to her back, knee, or upper extremities. The Board found that Applicant's counsel misunderstood the burden of proof and the medical dispute resolution procedures. Specifically, the Board noted that Dr. Green's reports were the sole medical evidence, and even if insufficient, it meant Applicant failed to meet her burden. Furthermore, the Board clarified the proper procedures for initiating evaluations under Labor Code sections 4060 and 4062, placing the onus on Applicant's counsel to ensure necessary evaluations were conducted by the Agreed Medical Evaluator.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDarlene RoweHacienda La Puente Unified School DistrictIntercare InsuranceOrder Denying Reconsiderationworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.industrial injuryback
References
1
Case No. ADJ2263476 (VNO 0318779)
Regular
Apr 20, 2016

DARLENE FERRONA vs. WARNER BROTHERS, TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT CO; ZURICH LOS ANGELES

This case concerns Darlene Ferrona's entitlement to 24/7 home health care following a psyche and fibromyalgia injury. The defendant, Warner Brothers, sought reconsideration of an order granting these services, arguing that utilization review only authorized limited care and that new prescriptions were required per Labor Code section 4600(h). The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming that the applicant's prior authorization of 24/7 home health care by treating physicians and subsequent stipulation established ongoing need. The Board clarified that while a prescription date is crucial for liability, a new prescription is not always necessary to continue approved, ongoing home health care if the applicant's condition has not changed, citing the precedent of *Patterson v. The Oaks Farm*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDarlene FerronaWarner BrothersZurich Los Angelesindustrial injurypsychefibromyalgiahome health careutilization reviewsubstantial medical evidence
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Daniels v. Zelco, Inc.

Edward Daniels, injured at work, received workers' compensation benefits. He and his wife, Darlene Daniels, sued his employer, St. Johnsbury Trucking Company, Inc., and its parent company, Sun Company, Inc., for personal injuries and wrongful discharge. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the order was reversed; the court ruled that Daniels' acceptance of workers' compensation was his exclusive remedy, precluding further negligence claims against his employer. Additionally, the wrongful discharge claim was dismissed due to the at-will employment doctrine and the mandatory arbitration clause in the collective bargaining agreement. The derivative claim for loss of consortium by Darlene Daniels also failed.

Workers' CompensationSummary JudgmentExclusive RemedyWrongful DischargeCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrationRes JudicataParent Company LiabilityLoss of ConsortiumAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. FRE 214256
Regular
Aug 17, 2007

DARLENE MURILLO vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO

This case concerns whether the 1997 or 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule applies to an applicant's foot injuries sustained while employed by the County of Fresno. The defendant sought reconsideration of the WCJ's decision to apply the 1997 Schedule, arguing a pre-2005 medical report did not establish permanent disability. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and remanded the case for a new decision using the 2005 Schedule.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCounty of FresnoDarlene MurilloFindings and AwardPermanent Disability1997 Schedule2005 ScheduleLabor Code section 4660(d)Qualified Medical EvaluatorMichael A. DiGiacomo
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 29 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