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

United States v. Needle Trades Workers' Industrial Union

The indictment charges the defendants, including the Needle Trades Workers’ Industrial Union, with violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act by conspiring to restrain interstate trade in raw skins. The conspiracy involved preventing non-union dressers from processing skins and dealers from shipping to them, employing violent tactics such as threats, assaults, destruction of property, and the use of explosives. The court addressed whether these actions constituted a restraint of interstate commerce, differentiating between local strikes with indirect effects and direct interference with interstate trade. It concluded that the alleged prevention of New York dealers from shipping skins to New Jersey dressers constituted a direct, substantial, and intentional interference with interstate commerce. The court also affirmed that shipping goods for processing across state lines is considered interstate commerce and clarified that the National Industrial Recovery Act did not repeal the Sherman Anti-Trust Act or legalize such a conspiracy. Consequently, the demurrer challenging the sufficiency of the indictment was overruled.

Sherman Anti-Trust ActInterstate CommerceLabor UnionConspiracyDemurrerIndictmentTrade RestraintViolenceSecondary BoycottLabor Disputes
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Local Union No. 3 of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

The court addresses demurrers to three indictments against Local Union No. 3 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers for alleged violations of the Sherman Act. The indictments claim the union conspired to prevent the installation of out-of-state electrical equipment in New York City, thereby diverting work to local manufacturers and increasing costs. Defendants argued that the Sherman Act does not apply to labor unions and that their actions constituted a 'labor dispute' immune from antitrust laws. The court rejected these arguments, finding that the alleged conspiracy's effect on market prices and free competition fell within the scope of the Sherman Act, and that the conduct did not constitute a legitimate 'labor dispute.' Consequently, the court overruled the demurrers.

Sherman ActLabor UnionsAntitrust LawInterstate CommerceRestraint of TradeDemurrersIndictmentsElectrical IndustrySecondary BoycottPrice Fixing
References
11
Case No. VNO 0481628
Regular
Mar 05, 2008

ANNOOSH AGHAJANI vs. FEDERATED MAY DEPARTMENT STORES, NATIONAL LIABILITY FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY C/O ACCAM

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior order that dismissed the applicant's petition to reopen for new and further disability. The Board found the prior order ambiguous and improperly treated as a demurrer, violating due process by denying the applicant a hearing on the merits. The case is returned to the trial level for a full hearing to determine the applicant's claims for increased orthopedic, psychiatric, and internal injuries.

Petition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilityOrthopedic DisabilityPsychiatric DisabilityGastric DisabilityDue ProcessSubstantial Medical EvidenceCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryDemurrer
References
2
Case No. ADJ8446012
Regular
Nov 28, 2017

Raymond Jackson vs. Holz Rubber Company, Liberty Mutual Fire and Marine Insurance, Hedy Holmes Staffing Services, AmTrust North America

Holz Rubber Company petitioned for removal of an order joining it as a defendant, arguing the claim was against another entity and joinder was barred by statute of limitations. The Appeals Board denied the petition, emphasizing removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Defendant did not demonstrate such harm, only that it would incur defense costs for a claim it deems meritless. All defenses can be raised later in the proceedings, as demurrers and summary judgment motions are not permitted in workers' compensation.

Petition for RemovalOrder of JoinderStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5410California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)Castle Point InsuranceSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmPetition for ReconsiderationDefense
References
2
Case No. ADJ20809270; ADJ18022996
Regular
Oct 09, 2025

ERIC RIGGS vs. STOCKWELL, HARRIS, WOOLVERTON & HELPHREY (A CORP), WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY

The defendant filed a petition for removal from an order setting the matter for trial, advocating for case consolidation and a summary dismissal of their petition. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, agreeing with the WCJ's recommendation. The WCAB stated that removal is an extraordinary remedy, requiring proof of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which the defendant failed to demonstrate, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse final decision is reached. The Board also noted that parties would have ample opportunity to create a record and address consolidation at trial, while reminding the defendant that demurrers or summary judgments are not permitted in these proceedings.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationSubstantial EvidenceConsolidationDuplicative ClaimsSummary DismissalAdministrative Law Judge
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jacobs v. Cohen

This case involves an action by the president of the Protective Coat Tailors and Pressers’ Union, Local No. 55, against Morris Cohen, Louis Cohen (comprising M. Cohen & Son), and Samuel Nelson, concerning a promissory note. The note was collateral for an agreement compelling the firm to exclusively employ union members and discharge non-members. The court deemed this agreement unlawful and contrary to public policy, referencing *Curran v. Galen* and distinguishing it from *National Protective Assn. v. Cumming*. The decision reversed an interlocutory judgment and overruled a demurrer, validating the defense that the promissory note secured an illegal covenant.

Labor Union ContractPublic PolicyUnlawful AgreementPromissory NoteRestraint of TradeFreedom of EmploymentMonopolyCoercionDemurrerAppeal
References
3
Showing 1-6 of 6 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