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. ADJ9537056
Regular
Mar 23, 2015

ROCIO CHAYRA vs. FIRST TRANSIT AMERICA, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves an appeal by the defendant regarding a workers' compensation award for an applicant injured as a bus driver. The applicant was awarded temporary disability benefits and a 25% penalty for the defendant's unreasonable delay in payment after a Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator's report indicated disability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify the penalty period, confirming the delay from December 9, 2013, to July 14, 2014, and affirming the defendant's liability for the penalty on that period, less any EDD lien. The Board found the defendant failed to commence benefits or act as required by Labor Code Section 4063 after receiving the PQME's report, justifying the penalty.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardROCIO CHAYRAFIRST TRANSIT AMERICANEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANYSEDGWICK CMSFindings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorPQMETemporary Total Disability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2012

Mehra v. City of New York

Petitioner Sushil Mehra sustained injuries on January 4, 2011, after falling from a scaffold during a construction project while employed by Vardaris Tech, Inc. Petitioners served a notice of claim on the New York City School Construction Authority (NYCSCA) on August 5, 2011, exceeding the statutory 90-day period. The Supreme Court initially granted the petitioners' motion to deem the notice of claim timely served. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, finding no reasonable excuse for the delay, no actual notice to NYCSCA within the statutory period, and substantial prejudice to NYCSCA due to the delay. Consequently, the motion to deem the notice of claim timely served was denied.

Notice of ClaimTimelinessLate FilingScaffold AccidentWorkers' CompensationPrejudiceActual NoticeGeneral Municipal LawLabor LawNew York City School Construction Authority
References
8
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 06881 [188 AD3d 1699]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 20, 2020

People v. Anderson

The People appealed an order that dismissed an indictment against Chasarea L. Anderson on statutory speedy trial grounds, specifically concerning a delay between July 14, 2017, and February 12, 2018. The defendant was indicted but later apprehended in Georgia. The County Court initially concluded that the People failed to demonstrate due diligence in locating the defendant during the aforementioned period. However, the Appellate Division reversed this finding, determining that law enforcement did exercise due diligence by thoroughly checking various databases, social media, criminal history reports, and investigating known addresses and employers. Consequently, the appellate court ruled that the period of delay should be excluded from speedy trial calculations, reinstated the indictment, and remitted the matter to County Court for further proceedings.

Speedy TrialDue DiligenceIndictmentDismissal ReversalSpeedy Trial CalculationAppellate ReviewCriminal Procedure LawNew York LawAbsence ExclusionApprehension Effort
References
14
Case No. ADJ3857516 (VNO 0505788)
Regular
Sep 20, 2013

ALBERTO ALCAZAR vs. PACTIV CORPORATION

This case involves a worker's compensation claim where the employer, Pactiv Corporation, was found to have unreasonably delayed necessary medical treatment, including transportation and home care. The Appeals Board modified a prior decision, finding the unreasonable delay occurred from December 20, 2010, to March 2, 2011, and reduced the penalty from 25% to 15% of the delayed benefits. The Board reversed the penalty for two instances of transportation failure by a hired company, deeming it not the employer's unreasonable conduct. Finally, attorney fees were reduced as some services were deemed unnecessary for the period of unreasonable delay.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAward and OrderUnreasonable DelayMedical TreatmentTransportationHome Care AssistanceLabor Code section 5814Penalty
References
1
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 00361 [124 AD3d 636]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2015

Williams v. Jamaica Hospital Medical Center

The infant plaintiff alleged personal injuries resulting from a delayed transport by the City of New York's Emergency Medical Service during his mother's labor. Approximately four years after the alleged negligence, the plaintiff served a notice of claim and moved to have it deemed timely or for leave to serve a late notice. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion and denied the City's cross-motion to dismiss. The Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed this order, finding that the City did not acquire actual knowledge of the essential facts of the claim within the statutory 90-day period or a reasonable time thereafter. The court further determined that the plaintiff's delay substantially prejudiced the City's ability to defend the action and that the plaintiff failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the significant delay, noting that infancy alone without a demonstrated nexus to the delay was insufficient.

Late Notice of ClaimGeneral Municipal LawActual Knowledge RequirementPrejudice to MunicipalityReasonable Excuse for DelayInfancyPersonal InjuryMedical Malpractice AllegationAppellate ReviewMunicipal Negligence
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Texaco Inc.

Texaco Inc. and its two subsidiaries, Texaco Capital Inc. and Texaco Capital N.V., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Texaco sought to extend the exclusive periods for filing a reorganization plan, citing the massive size of the case, over 300,000 creditors, and the pending appeal of a $10.3 billion judgment against it by Pennzoil Company. Pennzoil, a leading general unsecured creditor, moved to reduce these exclusivity periods to propose its own creditor's plan. The court, presided over by Bankruptcy Judge Howard Schwartzberg, considered the unprecedented size and complexity of Texaco's bankruptcy case, which is the largest ever filed in the U.S., and the unresolved multi-billion dollar Pennzoil judgment. The court found that Texaco had established sufficient cause for an extension, while Pennzoil failed to demonstrate cause for reduction. Consequently, Texaco's motion to extend the exclusivity periods by another 120 and 180 days was granted, and Pennzoil's motion to shorten them was denied.

BankruptcyChapter 11Exclusivity PeriodPlan of ReorganizationCorporate DebtorsComplex LitigationDebtor-Creditor DisputeJudgment AppealSouthern District of New YorkCorporate Restructuring
References
12
Case No. ADJ2304783 (OAK 0312156)
Regular
Jul 07, 2009

ROGELIO MARTINEZ vs. URBAN BROTHERS PAINTING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The defendant challenged penalties imposed for unreasonable delays in temporary and permanent disability indemnity payments. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to correct clerical errors identified by the WCJ. The WCAB amended the award to reflect a corrected period for the temporary disability delay and to grant the defendant credit for a self-imposed penalty on the permanent disability delay, otherwise affirming the original decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationTemporary Disability IndemnityPermanent Disability IndemnityPenaltySelf-Imposed PenaltyUnreasonable DelayClerical ErrorCreditFindings Award and Orders
References
1
Case No. ADJ7989442
Regular
Sep 18, 2015

KATH WALKER vs. GALICHON MACINNES, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an applicant seeking removal from an order delaying an expedited hearing on temporary disability benefits. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal, finding the applicant would suffer significant prejudice from the delay, especially given her two-year period of temporary total disability and lack of benefits. The WCAB rescinded the prior order, mandating an expedited hearing on temporary disability in the accepted case. This decision emphasizes the urgent nature of temporary disability claims and the inappropriable of delaying them for settlement conferences when benefits are overdue.

Petition for RemovalExpedited HearingTemporary DisabilityMandatory Settlement ConferenceIndustrial InjuryApportionmentIrreparable HarmLabor Code Section 5502(b)(4)Total Temporary DisabilityContribution Action
References
8
Case No. ADJ4631456 (AHM 0080569), ADJ4461257 (LAO 0786386)
Regular
Nov 15, 2010

, Eleanor Pereua vs. , Rio Hondo Community College; CIGA through its Servicing Facility Cambridge for Fremont In Liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted CIGA's petition for reconsideration because the original decision lacked clarity on the specific unpaid benefits, delay periods, and the basis for penalties. The Board rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings to obtain clear findings on delayed compensation, penalty amounts, and attorney fees. This action was taken due to insufficient evidence and vague findings by the administrative law judge regarding the extent of unpaid benefits and the reasonableness of any delay. The case will be reconsidered after the WCJ clarifies these issues with supporting evidence and makes explicit findings.

CIGALabor Code section 5814Labor Code section 5814.5Petition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings Award and OrderStipulations with Request for AwardTemporary Disability IndemnityPermanent Disability IndemnityAttorney's FeesPenalty
References
2
Case No. 534273
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 12, 2023

In the Matter of the Claim of Amber Bakerian

Claimant Amber Bakerian appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board. The Board had denied her request for a hearing concerning future wage expectancy under Workers' Compensation Law § 14 (5) and an award for protracted healing periods. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's denial of the wage expectancy issue, upholding the application of the laches doctrine due to the significant delay in raising the claim. However, the Court reversed the Board's decision regarding the protracted healing period, finding it erred in deeming the issue moot. Consequently, the case was remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with the Court's decision on the protracted healing period.

Workers' CompensationWage ExpectancyLachesSchedule Loss of UseTemporary Total DisabilityProtracted Healing PeriodAppellate ReviewRemittalPrejudiceMedical Opinions
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 2,877 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