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

People v. Weech

The case involves an appeal from a defendant's murder conviction where the case was remitted to Trial Term to reconstruct the defendant's competency to stand trial. Two psychiatrists, Dr. Wellington Reynolds and Dr. Odysseus Adamides, assessed the defendant's competency based on various reports and observations. Dr. Reynolds had examined the defendant prior to trial. The defendant challenged Dr. Reynolds' credentials, asserting he was not a "qualified psychiatrist" under CPL 730.10(5)(a). The court previously remitted the case for a reconstruction proceeding. This current decision remits the matter once more for an adversary inquiry into the defendant's competency, clarifying that Dr. Reynolds' testimony, even if not from a "qualified psychiatrist," is admissible, and other professionals like the social worker, nurse, defense counsel, and Trial Judge could also testify.

Competency to Stand TrialReconstruction ProceedingPsychiatric EvaluationCriminal Procedure LawAdmissibility of Expert TestimonyAppellate ReviewDue ProcessMental Health ServicesDefendant's RightsMurder Second Degree
References
7
Case No. ADJ10192587
Regular
Dec 27, 2017

TIMOTHY WILCOX vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involved a workers' compensation claim where the applicant, Timothy Wilcox, sought benefits for an abdominal injury sustained while lifting. The defendant contested the 50-pound lifting restriction recommended by the applicant's Qualified Medical Examiner (PQME), Dr. Fearer. The Appeals Board upheld the WCJ's decision, finding Dr. Fearer's medical opinion to be substantial evidence, even though it changed significantly. The Board adopted Dr. Fearer's reasoning that the 50-pound restriction, supported by applicant's credible testimony and affecting his ability to perform his firefighter duties, justified an increased permanent disability rating.

workers' compensationPetition for ReconsiderationQualified Medical ExaminerPQMEwhole person impairmentWPIlifting restrictioninternal herniasmall bowel resectionAlmaraz/Guzman
References
5
Case No. ADJ10613123
Regular
Oct 20, 2020

FRANCISCO BANUELOS (Dec'd), MICHELE BANUELOS vs. TIME WARNER, INC. (NOW CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS), NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE CO.

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a previous decision that found the deceased applicant sustained a work-related injury leading to colon cancer. The defendant argued against the admission and reliance on Dr. Reynolds's medical reporting and questioned Dr. Azizad's qualifications. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, upholding its prior decision that the injury was AOE/COE and that the medical evidence was substantial. The Board also found no merit in the defendant's contention regarding Dr. Reynolds's reporting under Labor Code section 4605.

AOE/COEinternal system injurydigestive system injurycolon cancerDr. Timothy ReynoldsDr. Masoud Azizadsubstantial medical evidencequalified medical evaluator paneloncologyLabor Code section 4605
References
0
Case No. ADJ8714466 & ADJ8128174
Regular
Mar 27, 2015

Christian Alegria vs. Laboratory Corporation of America, ACE American Insurance Company

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Lab Corp and its insurer, ACE American Insurance, challenging a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) award of 25% permanent disability and medical treatment. The defendants argued the award was improperly based on work restrictions and that the Permanent Disability (PD) rating should have solely relied on Dr. Reynolds' report. The WCJ's report, adopted by the WCAB, denied reconsideration. The WCJ found evidence of work modifications and accommodated restrictions, and deemed both Dr. Newman's and Dr. Reynolds' reports substantial, justifying a rating based on the range of evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCumulative InjuryBilateral Upper ExtremitiesPermanent DisabilityPPDMedical TreatmentWork RestrictionsPanel QME
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 23, 1995

Hansen v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.

Plaintiff Michele Hansen brought an action against her former employer, Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., alleging sex and pregnancy discrimination under Title VII, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the New York Human Rights Law. Hansen claimed her termination from her position as Assistant Vice President/Intermediate Mortgage-Backed "Repo" Trader was discriminatory. Following a bench trial, the court found that Hansen failed to establish that Dean Witter terminated her on the basis of her sex or pregnancy, or that the employer's stated reasons for termination were pretextual. The court also denied Hansen's motion for sanctions related to the destruction of trading tickets, concluding that Dean Witter was not on notice of the tickets' specific relevance to the litigation. Consequently, the plaintiff's complaint was dismissed.

Sex DiscriminationPregnancy DiscriminationEmployment TerminationTitle VIINew York Human Rights LawPretext for DiscriminationHostile Work Environment ClaimSpoliation of EvidenceRule 37(b) SanctionsBurden of Proof
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 29, 1999

Faele v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Plaintiff Rosemary Faele, a nurse at Coney Island Hospital, sustained an eye irritation and received brief examinations from defendants Dr. Barry Eppinger and Dr. An-nan Das in the hospital's emergency room. Her condition worsened, and she was later diagnosed with a severe eye infection by a private ophthalmologist. Though compensated via Workers' Compensation, Faele and her husband initiated a medical malpractice action against the doctors and the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint by granting summary judgment to the defendants. The appellate court affirmed this decision, ruling that a sufficient nexus existed between Faele's employment and the alleged malpractice, thereby precluding a common-law malpractice claim and limiting her recourse to Workers' Compensation.

Medical MalpracticeWorkers' Compensation PreclusionSummary Judgment AffirmationEmployment-Related InjuryHospital LiabilityEmergency Medical TreatmentAppellate Division DecisionPersonal InjuryDoctor-Patient NexusConey Island Hospital
References
4
Case No. ADJ1142998 (RDG 0118288)
Regular
Aug 18, 2009

STEVE REYNOLDS vs. WYCKOFF LOGGING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB had previously rescinded a finding that avascular necrosis was not a compensable consequence of the applicant's injury, finding the relied-upon medical opinion speculative. The defendant argues the WCJ correctly favored the opinion of Dr. Glancz over Dr. Barber. The WCAB denied reconsideration, reaffirming that Dr. Glancz's opinion was not substantial evidence due to repeated questioning of the injury mechanism, while Dr. Barber's opinion was persuasive and based on a complete history. Therefore, the WCAB maintained its prior decision that Dr. Barber's opinion constituted substantial evidence supporting the applicant's claim.

Avascular necrosiscompensable consequencesubstantial evidencemedical opinionworkers' compensation administrative law judgereconsiderationfindings and ordermedical treatmentindustrial basissubstantial evidence
References
1
Case No. ADJ4100246 (LAO 0801805)
Regular
Aug 19, 2011

VALERIE AYERS vs. LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER, Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior decision, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This action allows for Dr. Reynolds, the Agreed Medical Evaluator, to review additional evidence including trial testimony and air quality reports. Dr. Reynolds will issue a supplemental report, followed by a deposition and submission of previous reports into evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAgreed Medical EvaluatorIndustrial HygienistAir QualitySupplemental ReportTrial TestimonyDepositionReconsiderationRescinded DecisionFurther Proceedings
References
0
Case No. ADJ4292264
Regular
Jul 15, 2010

JOE GALVAN vs. FOXX BUILDING SERVICES, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, PACIFIC NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Joe Galvan, who sustained a shoulder injury resulting in post-traumatic Parkinson's disease. The defendant, Foxx Building Services, Inc., sought to remove a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) minute order denying their request for the Agreed Medical Examiner (AME), Dr. Reynolds, to testify at trial. The Board denied the petition for removal, citing regulations favoring written medical reports over live testimony absent good cause. The Board also found that the defendant failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or substantial prejudice from the denial of Dr. Reynolds' testimony.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalAMEDr. ReynoldsDr. JankovicDeposition TestimonyTrial TestimonyMedical ReportsPost-Traumatic Parkinson's DiseaseShoulder Injury
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. New York Hospital

Plaintiff, a registered nurse, filed an action under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act against The New York Hospital, its President Dr. David Skinner, and Assistant Director of Nursing Mr. Jody Sklar, alleging unlawful employment termination due to an alcoholism relapse. The plaintiff objected to a protective order preventing Dr. Skinner's deposition, while defendants sought to dismiss claims against individual defendants. The court granted dismissal against Mr. Sklar but denied it for Dr. Skinner, finding that individuals responsible for discriminatory decisions can be liable under the Act, especially those in positions to accept federal funds. Consequently, the protective order against deposing Dr. Skinner was set aside.

Rehabilitation Actemployment discriminationdisability rightsalcoholismindividual liabilitycorporate responsibilityprotective orderdiscoverymotion to dismiss
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 1,436 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