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

Laflamme v. Carpenters Local 370 Pension Plan

Plaintiff Michael LaFlamme initiated a class action against the Carpenters Local #370 Pension Plan and its Board of Trustees, alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) concerning the plan's 'freezing rule' for benefit accrual after a 'break in service.' LaFlamme sought a judicial declaration that this rule contravenes ERISA's minimum accrual standards, along with a reformation of the pension plan and recalculation of benefits for all affected class members. The court, presided over by District Judge Hurd, evaluated the motion for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b), finding that the requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation were met. Consequently, the motion for class certification was granted, establishing a class comprised of all plan participants, active or retired, who experienced a service break resulting in frozen benefit accrual rates. The decision also outlined procedures for providing notice to the newly certified class members, while deferring detailed adjudication of defenses like statute of limitations and exhaustion of remedies to later dispositive motions.

ERISAPension BenefitsClass ActionBenefit AccrualFreezing RuleBreaks in ServiceClass CertificationRule 23(a)Rule 23(b)Federal Civil Procedure
References
49
Case No. No. 14-CV-6449 (E.D.N.Y.)
Regular Panel Decision

AEI Life, LLC v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co.

This memorandum addresses whether a pending appeal in another circuit concerning a jurisdictional dismissal precludes the Eastern District of New York from exercising jurisdiction. The New Jersey District Court had previously dismissed an action by Lincoln Benefit Life Company (LBL) against AEI Life, LLC (AEI) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which LBL appealed. Subsequently, AEI initiated the current lawsuit in New York, seeking a declaration of policy validity and damages for alleged breach. The court concluded that the first-to-file rule is inapplicable here because the New Jersey court never secured jurisdiction. Additionally, a balance of convenience analysis favored New York as the appropriate venue, citing AEI's home forum, witness locations, and the locus of operative facts. Consequently, LBL's motion to dismiss or stay the action is denied, allowing the case to proceed in the Eastern District of New York.

JurisdictionSubject Matter JurisdictionPersonal JurisdictionFirst-to-File RuleFinal Judgment RuleChoice of LawVenueDiversity JurisdictionInsurance PolicySTOLI Scheme
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jeffries v. Pension Trust Fund of the Pension, Hospitalization & Benefit Plan of the Electrical Industry

Plaintiff Claude Jeffries, a retired electrician, sued the Pension Trust Fund of the Electrical Industry under ERISA, seeking to include pension credits from 1969-1975 in his current benefits. He alleged the Plan should have declared a partial termination during a 1975-1979 New York recession, which would have vested his benefits. The defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing lack of standing and statute of limitations, while plaintiff moved for class certification for similarly affected members. The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the claim for benefits, finding it timely, but granted dismissal for the breach of fiduciary duty claim as time-barred. The plaintiff's motion for class certification was denied due to insufficient evidence for numerosity, with leave to refile after discovery.

ERISAPension BenefitsClass CertificationMotion to DismissStatute of LimitationsFiduciary DutyPartial TerminationBenefit ForfeitureUnemploymentLabor Union
References
15
Case No. ADJ1350252
Regular
Nov 28, 2011

REFUGIO PEREZ vs. ORANGE PLASTICS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant who suffered an industrial injury resulting in permanent disability and a life pension. The applicant's attorney petitioned for reconsideration, arguing that attorney fees were not awarded for the life pension benefits. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, agreeing that fees are due on the life pension. The Board amended its prior decision to defer the attorney fees issue for the life pension to the trial level for further determination. The matter is returned to the trial judge for this specific purpose.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRefugio PerezOrange PlasticsState Compensation Insurance FundReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityLife PensionAttorney FeesCost of Living AdjustmentsBaker v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
1
Case No. ADJ1649257 (POM0263288)
Regular
Jun 05, 2017

RICARDO MUNGUIA vs. ML STEEL CORPORATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the issue of a life pension, which was erroneously omitted despite a $77\%$ permanent disability award. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision regarding permanent disability but amended it to defer the life pension issue. This matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ on the life pension.

Petition for ReconsiderationLife PensionPermanent DisabilityLabor Code Section 4659Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDecision After ReconsiderationDeferred IssueTrial Level JurisdictionDisability IndemnityAttorney Fees
References
0
Case No. ADJ1666882 (SDO 0361801)
Regular
Aug 05, 2009

PHILLIP EWERT vs. CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, permissibly selfinsured

This case involves a firefighter with prostate cancer who was awarded 70% permanent disability and a life pension. The employer sought reconsideration, arguing the disability rating was too high and inconsistent with AMA Guides and the 2005 Schedule. The Appeals Board affirmed the 70% disability rating but granted reconsideration to amend the award to include annual increases for the life pension. The Board also deferred the issue of the applicant's attorney's fee pending a present value calculation of the life pension and further consideration by the WCJ.

Prostate cancerfirefighter injurypermanent disability ratingAMA Guides2005 ScheduleLabor Code section 4660life pensionsection 4659(c)state average weekly wageattorney's fee
References
0
Case No. OAK 287370
Regular
Oct 22, 2007

JUAN CARLOS AVILA vs. PROFINISHING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The defendant sought reconsideration of an award for a right lower extremity industrial injury, arguing the judge improperly considered labor market competitiveness for a less than 100% permanent disability rating and miscalculated weekly life pension benefits. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the disability rating but deferring the calculation of weekly life pension benefits for parties to informally adjust, reserving jurisdiction. The decision incorporates the judge's report and amends the award regarding the life pension calculation.

Petition for ReconsiderationPermanent Disability RatingDiminished Ability to CompeteOpen Labor MarketTemporary DisabilityLife PensionLabor Code Section 4659Industrial InjuryPainter/Material HandlerFindings Award and Order
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Spear, Leeds & Kellogg v. Central Life Assurance Co.

Plaintiff Spear, Leeds & Kellogg (SLK), a registered futures commission merchant and a member of the New York Stock Exchange, sought a preliminary injunction against three life insurance companies (Defendants) to prevent compulsory arbitration. Defendants had filed an arbitration demand with the NYSE, seeking recovery of monies they paid out on life insurance policies of a customer named Marvin Goodman. Defendants alleged that SLK either falsified account documents or knew of their falsification by Goodman, leading to their losses. SLK argued it had no transactional nexus with Defendants and thus no obligation to arbitrate under NYSE Constitution and Rules. The court found no valid arbitration agreement between the parties and granted SLK's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining Defendants from compelling arbitration. The court emphasized that arbitration is a creature of contract, and no such contract existed between SLK and the Defendant insurance companies.

ArbitrationPreliminary InjunctionNYSE RulesContract LawSecuritiesInsuranceDispute ResolutionNon-Member ArbitrationFinancial FraudFalsified Documents
References
9
Case No. ADJ2977853
Regular
Oct 01, 2010

JORGE ALVAREZ vs. PEREZ FARMS & ASSOCIATES, STATE COMFENEATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a defendant's reconsideration of a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision regarding attorney's fees and a life pension calculation. The defendant argued that the calculated life pension rate and associated attorney's fees lacked justification and proper explanation, particularly concerning annual cost of living adjustments. The WCAB granted reconsideration, noting issues with the provided commutation worksheets, including a different employee's name. Consequently, the Board amended its decision to defer the calculation of the life pension and its related attorney's fees, remanding the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and opportunity for parties to present rebuttal evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLife PensionAttorney FeeCommutationPermanent DisabilityApportionmentIndustrial InjuryMedical TreatmentWCJ
References
0
Case No. 11 CV 1471
Regular Panel Decision

Martinez v. Bakery & Confectionery Union & Industry International Pension Fund

The case involves multiple plaintiffs, participants in the Bakery and Confectionery Union and Industry International Pension Fund Pension Plan, who challenged an amendment to the plan. This amendment eliminated the ability for participants no longer in covered employment to "age into" certain early retirement benefits (Plan C and Plan G). Plaintiffs alleged this violated Section 204(g) of ERISA, the anti-cutback rule, which protects accrued benefits. The Court, applying the standard for judgment on the pleadings, found that the Plan C and Plan G benefits are early retirement or retirement-type subsidies and thus accrued benefits under ERISA. Relying on statutory text and precedent like *Ahng v. Allsteel, Inc.*, the Court ruled that the amendment impermissibly cut back accrued benefits for those employees who had met the years of service requirement and could continue to age into their pension benefits even after separation from employment. Consequently, the Court granted the plaintiffs' motions for judgment on the pleadings and denied the defendants' motions.

ERISAPension PlanRetirement BenefitsAnti-cutback RuleEmployee BenefitsJudgment on the PleadingsDefined Benefit PlanEarly RetirementAccrued BenefitsPlan Amendment
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 1,944 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