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

Koninklijke Philips Electronics v. Digital Works, Inc.

This case involves a breach of contract dispute between Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. (plaintiff) and Digital Works, Inc. (defendant) concerning a Compact Disc Patent License Agreement. Philips initiated the lawsuit in New York State Court, asserting breach of contractual obligations, which Digital Works subsequently removed to federal court. Digital Works also moved to dismiss the claims based on lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue. The court upheld the validity and enforceability of the Agreement's forum selection clause, which mandated jurisdiction in New York and included a waiver of objection to jurisdiction and venue by Digital Works. Consequently, the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied, and the plaintiff's motion to remand the action back to the New York State Supreme Court, Westchester County, was granted. However, Philips' request for attorney's fees and costs incurred due to the removal was denied, as the court found Digital Works' removal was not frivolous.

Breach of ContractPatent LicensingForum Selection ClausePersonal Jurisdiction WaiverRemoval JurisdictionContract EnforcementDiversity ActionChoice of ForumContractual WaiversCommercial Dispute
References
30
Case No. No. 09 Civ. 10155
Regular Panel Decision

Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. v. Westinghouse Digital Electronics, LLC

Plaintiffs, Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. and Erik Andersen, initiated a copyright infringement action in 2009 against several electronics distributors, including Westinghouse Digital Electronics, LLC (WDE), for their use of the BusyBox software. In 2010, the court issued a default judgment and a permanent injunction against WDE. The current motion by plaintiffs seeks to hold Westinghouse Digital LLC (WD), a non-party, in contempt of this earlier injunction. The court determined that WD is a successor in interest to WDE under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d) due to substantial continuity of identity, and is therefore bound by the injunction. WD's defenses, including a prior FCC order and fair use, were rejected by the court. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion to hold WD in contempt, deferring the decision on specific damages and attorneys' fees pending further submissions from the parties.

Copyright InfringementContempt of CourtInjunctionSuccessor LiabilityRule 65(d)Fair Use DoctrineBusyBox SoftwareOpen SourceDefault JudgmentFCC Order
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

the Claim of Brigandi v. Town & Country Linoleum & Carpet

This case involves an appeal by an employer and its compensation carrier against decisions made by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The decedent, a carpet layer, died from cardiac arrest during work, with an autopsy revealing underlying coronary atherosclerotic disease. His widow was awarded death benefits. The employer’s carrier sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8), asserting a preexisting permanent physical impairment. However, the Board determined that there was no evidence that the decedent’s heart condition hindered his job potential before his death, thus releasing the Special Disability Fund from liability and holding the compensation carrier responsible. The employer's subsequent application for reconsideration was denied by the Board, leading to these appeals. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decisions, concluding that the Board rationally found no proof that the decedent's heart disease impaired his job potential, a necessary condition for reimbursement under WCL § 15 (8) (d).

Special Disability FundPreexisting Permanent ImpairmentCardiac ArrestCoronary Atherosclerotic DiseaseDeath Benefits ClaimEmployer ReimbursementCarrier LiabilityBoard Decision ReviewAppellate AffirmationMedical Evidence Interpretation
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Allen v. Advanced Digital Information Corp.

Plaintiff Lucinda Allen filed suit against her former employer, Advanced Digital Information Corporation (ADIC), alleging sex-based hostile work environment, unequal pay under the Equal Pay Act (EPA), gender-based discrimination under Title VII and NYHRL, and retaliatory termination. ADIC moved for summary judgment on all claims. The court granted ADIC's motion regarding Allen's hostile work environment and EPA claims, finding the former lacked sufficient severity or pervasiveness and the latter had been abandoned. However, the court denied summary judgment on Allen's sex discrimination and retaliation claims, concluding that material questions of fact remained regarding ADIC's discriminatory intent and the causal link between Allen's protected activities and her termination. Consequently, the sex discrimination and retaliation claims will proceed to trial.

Employment DiscriminationSex DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary JudgmentTitle VIIEqual Pay ActNew York State Human Rights LawWorkplace HarassmentGender Discrimination
References
48
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Milner v. Country Developers, Inc.

The Special Disability Fund appealed decisions by the Workmen’s Compensation Board which imposed liability on the Fund for a claimant's injuries. The Board found that the employer, Country Developers, continued to employ the claimant, a carpenter, with knowledge of his pre-existing permanent physical impairment, triggering liability under subdivision 8 of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The claimant suffered a fracture of the nose and a hip dislocation in 1964, having a history of three ruptured disc surgeries and other conditions. The appeal centered on whether the employer had sufficient knowledge of the claimant’s permanent condition. Testimony from the employer’s foreman, Mr. Pahlck, indicated awareness of the claimant's back issues, including wearing a back brace and being favored by co-workers. The court affirmed the Board’s decision, reiterating that employer knowledge is a question of fact for the Board, and its findings, if supported by substantial evidence, will not be disturbed.

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial Disability FundEmployer LiabilityPre-existing Permanent ImpairmentEmployer KnowledgeSubstantial EvidencePermanent Partial DisabilityFracture of NoseHip DislocationRuptured Discs
References
3
Case No. ADJ7251479
Regular
Jun 02, 2015

ROBERT NORTON vs. NEO DIGITAL, A DIVISION OF 20TH CENTURY FOX/FOX ENTERTAINMENT GROUP

This case concerns defendant Neo Digital's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision denying a credit for alleged permanent disability overpayment. The WCJ previously found defendant was not entitled to a credit of $7,350.86 against benefits and liens. The WCAB denied reconsideration, agreeing that allowing such a credit against future medical treatment would disrupt the applicant's ability to receive necessary care. The Board emphasized that credit allowance is discretionary and equitable principles, including protecting the applicant from prejudice, guide such decisions.

Petition for ReconsiderationPermanent Disability OverpaymentAgreed Medical ExaminerStipulated AwardCredit for OverpaymentLabor Code § 4909Discretionary AuthorityEquitable PrinciplesDisruptive BenefitsPrejudice to Employee
References
3
Case No. ADJ3057272 (RDG 0125821)
Regular
Dec 03, 2010

FIDEL NAZARENO vs. OLD DURHAM WOOD COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a permanent disability award, arguing the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) impairment rating was inconsistent with AMA Guides. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the award, and returned the matter for further development of the record. Issues include the DEU rater improperly separating AME's combined whole person impairment and the AME needing to clarify his reasoning on grip loss and potential overlap with other impairments. The AME will also re-evaluate impairment without referencing prior DEU ratings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDAgreed Medical EvaluatorAMEpermanent disabilityAMA GuidesDEU raterrating instructionswhole person impairmentFindings and AwardPetition for Reconsideration
References
1
Case No. ADJ7927652
Regular
Oct 25, 2016

Bozenna Kasperowicz vs. Metropolitan State Hospital, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves an industrial injury to the applicant, a psychiatric technician, sustained on June 14, 2011, from a patient strike to the head. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to address disputes over psychiatric impairment and a sleep disorder rating. The WCAB affirmed the original award but reduced the permanent disability rating from 76% to 70% by excluding the sleep dysfunction impairment. The WCAB found Dr. O'Brien's opinion on psychiatric impairment more persuasive than conflicting medical evaluations and determined Dr. Matos's opinion on sleep impairment lacked substantial medical evidence due to staleness.

WCABReconsiderationPsychiatric ImpairmentWhole Person ImpairmentGAF ScoreSleep DisorderSubstantial Medical EvidencePermanent DisabilityQualified Medical EvaluatorInsomnia
References
0
Case No. ADJ10243412
Regular
Jun 10, 2019

DEBRA LUX vs. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA

This case involves an injured firefighter seeking workers' compensation for a right knee injury. The defendant sought reconsideration of a finding of 17% permanent disability, arguing the administrative law judge erred by combining range of motion and diagnosis-based impairments, and by not apportioning the diagnosis-based impairment. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the medical evaluator adequately explained the departure from standard AMA Guides methodology for rating the combined impairments. The Board also affirmed no apportionment of the diagnosis-based impairment as no substantial evidence showed non-industrial factors contributed to the need for surgery.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantPermissibly Self-InsuredAdministered by CORVELFirefighterIndustrial InjuryRight KneePermanent DisabilityWhole Person Impairment
References
5
Case No. ADJ7713711
Regular
Mar 11, 2016

JULIANA MASTERS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

The Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the WCJ's decision, upholding the finding that applicant's sleep impairment, though present, was subsumed by the physical upper extremity impairments and thus not separately ratable. The Board found the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion on sleep disorder impairment was not substantial evidence as it was predicated on pain already accounted for in the physical injury ratings per the AMA Guides. Therefore, the applicant's permanent disability rating remained at 69%. A dissenting opinion argued the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion should be followed, as it addressed distinct impairments beyond pain and was supported by relevant case law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAmended Findings of Fact and AwardsIndustrial InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheBook BinderSleep ImpairmentAMA GuidesPermanent DisabilityAgreed Medical Examiner
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 774 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