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. 2019 NY Slip Op 04295 [172 AD3d 655]
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2019

Capital Bus. Credit LLC v. Tailgate Clothing Co., Corp.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Supreme Court order regarding a dispute between Capital Business Credit LLC (plaintiff) and Tailgate Clothing Company, Corp. (defendant). Plaintiff purchased accounts receivable from a nonparty related to clothing manufacturing. Defendant paid some invoices but left 12 outstanding. Defendant claimed an equitable recoupment credit for payments made to the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) for severance pay to Honduran workers, which became due after the manufacturer violated local law by not paying severance. The Court found issues of fact precluding summary judgment on the account stated claim and correctly sustained the equitable recoupment defense, noting it was based on transactions linked to the defendant's licensing and manufacturing agreements. The court also rejected plaintiff's waiver and estoppel arguments.

Equitable recoupmentAccount stated claimSummary judgmentAccounts receivableBreach of contractTimeliness of objectionLicensing agreementManufacturing agreementHonduran labor lawSeverance pay
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Credit One Financial v. Anderson (In re Anderson)

Plaintiff Orrin Anderson, a debtor, had his credit card debt with Credit One discharged in bankruptcy, but the debt remained on his credit report as 'charged off.' Anderson reopened his bankruptcy case and filed a class action complaint against Credit One for alleged violations of the discharge injunction. Credit One moved to compel arbitration, strike class allegations, and dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which the Bankruptcy Court denied. Credit One appealed the denial to compel arbitration as of right and sought leave to appeal the denials to strike class allegations and dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The District Court denied Credit One's motion for leave to appeal, finding no basis for pendent appellate jurisdiction or interlocutory appeal for the additional issues.

Bankruptcy Discharge InjunctionClass Action WaiverSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealPendent Appellate JurisdictionArbitration AgreementFederal Statutory ClaimsContempt PowerPunitive DamagesInjunctive Relief
References
49
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thoms v. Educational Credit Management Corp. (In Re Thoms)

Kashima Thoms, a Chapter 7 debtor, initiated an adversary proceeding seeking the discharge of her substantial student loan obligations totaling $90,948.58, citing "undue hardship" under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8). Educational Credit Management Corp. (ECMC) became the primary defendant, administering all of Thoms's student loans. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court applied the Second Circuit's stringent three-part Brunner test, which requires demonstrating an inability to maintain a minimal living standard, persistence of this hardship, and good faith repayment efforts. The Court found that Thoms, earning $48,000 annually, had sufficient disposable income, and her financial prospects were likely to improve, particularly with potential changes in childcare expenses and family living arrangements. Crucially, Thoms had made only minimal payments years prior and failed to utilize available loan restructuring options, thereby failing to prove good faith. Consequently, the Court ruled that Thoms did not establish undue hardship, denying the discharge of her student loan debts.

Bankruptcy LawStudent Loan DischargeUndue Hardship DoctrineBrunner TestChapter 7 BankruptcyAdversary ProceedingFinancial DistressRepayment EffortsFederal Student LoansDebtor-Creditor Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Arena v. Crown Asphalt Co.

Thomas Arena (decedent) sustained a work-related foot injury in 1980, leading to workers' compensation benefits and subsequent renal failure. Decedent and his wife (claimant) filed a third-party medical malpractice action against treating physicians and the hospital, which was settled in 1988 through a structured settlement. A stipulation between the carrier and decedent outlined the carrier's offset credit against decedent's workers' compensation claim and reserved rights against future death benefits claims, but claimant was not a signatory. After decedent's death in 1993, claimant filed for death benefits, prompting the carrier to seek an offset credit from the third-party settlement proceeds. The Workers’ Compensation Board initially found the carrier entitled to a credit, but later reversed itself, ruling against any credit. The appeals court determined that the carrier sufficiently preserved its offset rights through a general release signed by both claimant and decedent. However, it found no clear agreement on the specific offset amount in the stipulation or settlement that applied to claimant's death benefits. Consequently, the Board's decision of zero credit was reversed, and the matter was remitted for a factual determination of the precise credit amount.

Offset CreditThird-Party SettlementDeath Benefits ClaimRenal FailureMedical MalpracticeStipulation AgreementGeneral ReleaseWaiver of RightsStructured SettlementApportionment of Damages
References
12
Case No. ADJ10228371 ADJ580886 (VNO 0437854) ADJ2267886 (VNO 0492610) ADJ8376625
Regular
Mar 18, 2019

RICHARD TULL vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION

The California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending a prior order to correct the date of injury in case ADJ580886. The Board deferred the issues of whether the defendant overpaid permanent disability benefits in ADJ580886 and whether any overpayment could be credited against benefits in other consolidated cases (ADJ2267886, ADJ8376625, ADJ10228371). The Board found the original decision lacked sufficient explanation regarding the overpayment and credit claims. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on these deferred issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOverpayment of Permanent Disability BenefitsCredit for OverpaymentDate of Injury CorrectionLabor Code Section 5313Clerical ErrorJudicial ErrorSubstantial EvidenceStipulated Award
References
0
Case No. ADJ1749318 (OAK 0338628)
Regular
Nov 03, 2015

EDGAR PUENTE vs. MACY'S WEST

This case involves Macy's West seeking removal of an order denying their petition for a $500 credit related to a missed QME appointment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal, finding that summary denial of the credit petition would cause prejudice. The Board amended the original order to defer the issue of the credit petition until the applicant's underlying claims are settled or tried. This allows Macy's to present evidence and arguments for the credit at a later, more appropriate stage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalOrder Denying Petition for CreditQME appointmentLabor Code section 5811Petition for Creditmedical-legal costmissed appointment feecompensable consequencehypertension
References
3
Case No. ADJ7479989
Regular
Dec 18, 2015

CARMEN ANDRADE vs. VISITING NURSE & HOSPICE CARE SANTA BARBARA, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision that allowed the defendant a credit against her workers' compensation award for her full third-party settlement recovery. The applicant argued the credit should be limited to her net recovery of $2,449.62. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to prove resolution of the defendant's credit rights. The Board amended the decision to defer the exact credit amount, remanding for further proceedings to determine its value. The September 29, 2015 decision was otherwise affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderThird Party CreditNet RecoveryLabor Code Section 3861Industrial InjuryCompromise and ReleaseLien ClaimEmployer Negligence
References
4
Case No. ADJ10021120 ADJ8949346
Regular
Apr 14, 2017

ANTHONY BERNARD EDWARDS (Dec'd), CANDACE EDWARDS (Widow), ASHLEY EDWARDS (Daughter), ANTHONY EDWARDS, JR. (Son) vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES; LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves a workers' compensation death benefit claim for Anthony Bernard Edwards, who died in the course of his employment. The dependents seek death benefits and burial expenses, which were initially awarded by the WCJ. The employer, City of Los Angeles, sought reconsideration, arguing it should receive credit for a third-party settlement the dependents obtained from Kaiser Permanente. The Board agreed to reconsider the issue of credit, specifically whether Civil Code section 3333.1 bars such credit. The Board ultimately deferred the credit issue, affirming the death benefit award and returning the matter for further proceedings to determine the applicability of Civil Code section 3333.1 and potential employer negligence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ10021120ADJ8949346death benefitsLabor Code section 4702burial expensesCivil Code section 3333.1Medical Injury Compensation Reform ActMICRAthird-party settlement
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 21, 2000

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Credit Bancorp, Ltd.

Stephenson Equity Company (SECO), a plaintiff-intervenor, moved to compel non-party Swiss American Securities Inc. (SASI) to produce documents related to a pooled omnibus account held by Credit Suisse (Zurich) at SASI, believing these documents would identify beneficial owners, specifically Credit Bancorp. SASI opposed, arguing it lacked control over such specific information as broker-dealer regulations do not mandate identifying ultimate beneficial owners in pooled corporate accounts, and also referencing Swiss bank privacy laws. The court ultimately denied SECO's motion, concluding that SECO failed to demonstrate that SASI had the requisite control or access to the Credit Bancorp-specific documents in the ordinary course of business.

Discovery motionMotion to compelRule 45 FRCPSubpoena duces tecumBroker-dealer regulationsOmnibus accountsBeneficial ownershipCorporate controlSister corporationsSecurities law
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jarovic v. Icon Restoration & Contracting

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision concerning an employer's workers' compensation carrier's credit against a claimant's third-party settlement. The Board's initial ruling, which granted the carrier full credit, was deemed inconsistent with the principles established in *Matter of Stenson v New York State Dept. of Transp.* The current court found that the Board incorrectly asserted it lacked authority to address the manner of credit and failed to consider the carrier's contribution to litigation costs. Citing a shift in the Board's approach following *Stenson*, the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board is reversed. The matter is remitted to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the Court's guidance.

Workers' CompensationThird-Party SettlementCreditLitigation CostsAppellate ReviewRemittalStenson PrecedentBoard AuthorityNew York StateWorkers’ Compensation Board
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 2,133 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