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. CV-24-1036
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 11, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Donna Brickner

Claimant Donna Brickner appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board, which found she did not sustain a permanent total disability but rather a permanent partial disability of 90% following a work injury in 2019. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a permanent partial disability based on a carrier consultant's opinion that claimant was capable of sedentary work with significant restrictions. Claimant sought administrative review, arguing for a permanent total disability based on medical evidence. The Board affirmed its decision, relying on the claimant's treating physician's findings and the claimant's self-reported functional abilities, which indicated she was capable of greater activity than the carrier's consultant suggested, thus concluding there was insufficient credible medical evidence for a permanent total disability.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityPermanent Total DisabilityMedical EvidenceLumbar Spine InjuryChronic Pain SyndromeSedentary Work RestrictionsDisability AssessmentAdministrative ReviewAppellate Decision
References
6
Case No. CV-23-1425
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 13, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Harold Hanson (dec'd) Donna Hanson

The Appellate Division reversed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying death benefits to Donna Hanson for her deceased husband, Harold Hanson. Harold, a field service technician for General Electric, died from an acute aortic dissection, which claimant alleged was work-related. The case involved extensive procedural history, including a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially establishing the claim, followed by the Board's rescission and subsequent preclusion of claimant's medical evidence, specifically reports from Dr. Stern and Dr. Basri. The WCLJ ultimately disallowed the claim due to a lack of medical evidence, a decision affirmed by the Board. The Appellate Division found the Board's reasoning for precluding evidence inconsistent with its assertion that claimant had "ample opportunity" to submit proof, and also noted the Board's reliance on an inaccurate reading of the record, necessitating a remittal for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation LawDeath Benefits ClaimCausal RelationshipAortic DissectionHypertensionMedical Report AdmissibilityProcedural ErrorsPresumption of CompensabilityBurden ShiftingAppellate Division
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Donna v. Dodd, Mead & Co., Inc.

Natalie Donna, co-author of the children's book *Boy of the Masai*, sued her co-author, Peter Larsen, and publisher, Dodd, Mead & Company, alleging copyright infringement, conspiracy to infringe, and unfair trade practices. Donna's claims arose from three subsequent books by Larsen and his wife, which used a similar format to their original collaboration. Donna contended that *Boy of the Masai* was a composite work, implying separate copyrights for her text. The court, however, applied Second Circuit precedent, ruling that *Boy of the Masai* is a joint work, where co-owners cannot infringe their own copyright. Consequently, the court dismissed the copyright infringement and conspiracy claims, and the unfair trade practices claim was also dismissed due to a lack of pendent jurisdiction, resulting in the dismissal of the complaint in its entirety.

copyright lawjoint authorshipintellectual propertypublishing contractslegal precedentfederal courtjurisdictionliterary propertyco-ownershipinfringement claims
References
8
Case No. ADJ9240712
Regular
Jul 12, 2016

LUCRECIA REYES vs. DONNA EICHHORN, dba DONNA'S TAMALES, SEQUOIA INSURANCE COMPANY

In the case of Reyes v. Donna's Tamales, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of an April 26, 2016 decision. The WCAB determined reconsideration was necessary to allow for a more thorough study of the factual and legal issues. This action is intended to ensure a complete understanding of the record and facilitate a just and reasoned decision. All future correspondence regarding the petition must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners and not with any district office.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationSan Francisco District OfficeAmtrust North AmericaSequoia Insurance CompanyDonna's TamalesLucretia ReyesStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal Issues
References
0
Case No. ADJ8241877
Regular
May 02, 2014

CONNA NICHOLS, DONNA NICHOLS, DONNA M. NICHOLS vs. EARLY LEARNING INSTITUTE, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY CO.

This case concerns a Petition for Removal denied by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The applicant, Donna Nichols, sought removal of an order compelling her deposition, alleging defects and medical inability to attend. The WCAB adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) report, which found the petition lacked merit. The WCJ reasoned that the deposition order was not a "walk-through" petition and that the applicant's medical evidence was insufficient to justify further delay.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor Code section 5313Smales v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.ADJ8241877depositionPetition to Compel Attendance at DepositionDeclaration of Readiness to Proceedwalk-through petition
References
1
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 03554
Regular Panel Decision
May 07, 2019

Matter of Zavion O. (Donna O.)

This consolidated appeal addresses the legality of protective arrest warrants issued by Family Court for two infants, Zavion O. and Serenity R.L., who are chronic absconders from foster care. The infants exhibit significant behavioral and mental health challenges, leading Family Court to issue warrants under Family Court Act § 153 to ensure their health and safety. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed these orders, holding that FCA § 153 does not authorize protective arrests for non-respondent children who are not required as witnesses in a proceeding. The court emphasized Family Court's limited jurisdiction, stating that the 'parens patriae' doctrine cannot create statutory authority. While acknowledging the compelling need for effective tools to manage serial absconders, the court concluded that any such authorization must originate from the legislature.

Child WelfareFamily Court JurisdictionArrest Warrant LegalityProtective CustodyAbsconding ChildrenStatutory InterpretationParens Patriae DoctrineAppellate ReviewFoster CareJuvenile Delinquency
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Silverman v. New York State Workers' Compensation Board

This is a dissenting opinion from Judge Malone Jr. concerning the Workers' Compensation Board's denial of Donna Silverman's license renewal application. The Board denied the renewal based on her alleged lack of knowledge of Workers' Compensation Law, particularly regarding claimant advice on job searches, and an undisclosed partnership with her husband, Irwin Silverman. Judge Malone Jr. argues that the Board's questioning was vague and her responses were adequate, and that the finding of an undisclosed partnership was arbitrary and capricious, lacking a clear definition and sufficient evidence. The dissent would reverse the Supreme Court’s judgment, which upheld the Board’s decision, but the final order states that the judgment is affirmed.

License RenewalWorkers' Compensation RepresentativeProfessional CompetenceUndisclosed PartnershipDissenting OpinionAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewArbitrary and CapriciousRegulatory InterpretationLabor Market Attachment
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zeng Liu v. Donna Karan International, Inc.

The defendant, Donna Karan International, Inc., sought discovery into the immigration status of the plaintiffs. Senior District Judge Whitman Knapp denied this request, distinguishing between back pay for unperformed work and unpaid wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The court noted that immigration status is generally undiscoverable in FLSA cases. Furthermore, the judge determined that the potential harm to plaintiffs, including intimidation and inhibition of pursuing their rights, outweighed the need for disclosure, even with a confidentiality agreement. The court allowed the defendant to renew the request if circumstances change.

Discovery DisputeImmigration StatusFair Labor Standards ActUndocumented WorkersPrivacyDiscovery LimitationsJudicial DiscretionPrecedent AnalysisEmployer-Employee DisputeFederal Court
References
7
Case No. ADJ2218706 (VNO 0501260) ADJ1058308 (VNO 0482296)
Regular
Apr 19, 2010

DONNA DeRUSSY vs. ANTELOPE VALLEY HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, TRAVELER'S INSURANCE, SAFETY NATIONAL, FRONTIER INSURANCE

This case concerns appeals from a workers' compensation judge's decision regarding liability for cumulative trauma injury. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify the determination of the date of injury under Labor Code § 5412, which is crucial for assigning liability to the insurer covering the last year of exposure. The Board found the WCJ's decision lacked sufficient clarity and specific findings regarding disability and knowledge of causation. Therefore, the prior decision was rescinded, and the case was returned for further proceedings to make clear findings consistent with established legal principles.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDonna DeRussyAntelope Valley Health Care SystemTravelers InsuranceSafety NationalFrontier Insurancecumulative traumadate of injuryLabor Code §5500.5Labor Code §5412
References
2
Case No. ADJ1058308 (VNO 0482296)
Regular
May 28, 2013

DONNA DeRUSSY vs. ANTELOPE VALLEY HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, TRAVELERS INSURANCE, SAFETY NATIONAL, FRONTIER INSURANCE

This case involves a workers' compensation appeal where the defendants seek reconsideration of a prior award. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and remanded the case for further proceedings. The primary grounds for this decision were that the defendants were denied due process by not being given an opportunity to cross-examine the rating rater and that the award relied on outdated medical reports. The WCAB also suggested obtaining current medical evaluations due to the time elapsed since the original reports.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardAttorney FeesPermanent Disability RatingApportionmentIndustrial InjuryLumbar SpineTreating PhysiciansMedical Reports
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 56 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