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. FRE 0232051
Regular
Sep 17, 2007

EARL BACHANT vs. CITY OF FRESNO

The Appeals Board reversed the trial judge's decision, finding that Labor Code section 4458.5 did not apply to a firefighter who retired before developing a work-related cancer that manifested years later. Consequently, the applicant's average weekly earnings for indemnity benefits were determined by his stipulated zero earnings at the time of disability, not his pre-retirement earnings, resulting in the minimum indemnity rate. The Board emphasized that earnings are assessed at the time of first compensable disability, and section 4458.5's specific enumerated statutes and timeframes were not met.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of FresnoPermissibly Self-InsuredEarl Bachantfirefightercarcinogenscancerpermanent and stationarydate of injuryLabor Code section 5412
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Earl-Buck v. Barnhart

Plaintiff Candace Earl-Buck sought Title II Social Security Disability Insurance benefits, alleging disability due to various impairments since June 15, 1999. Her claim was denied at initial and reconsideration levels, and subsequently by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and the Appeals Council. Plaintiff then brought this action in district court to review the Commissioner's final determination. The district court found that the ALJ applied the correct legal standards and that her decision was supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, and plaintiff's motion was denied, leading to the dismissal of the action.

Social Security DisabilityTitle II BenefitsCarpal Tunnel SyndromeDiabetesPancreatitisNeuropathyArthritisDisability DeterminationALJ DecisionSubstantial Evidence
References
21
Case No. ADJ3317169 (FRE 0210465); ADJ2130054 (FRE 0162261); ADJ4055925 (FRE 0210461); ADJ728821 (FRE 0210462); ADJ2475719 (FRE 0210463); ADJ3052880 (FRE 0226010); ADJ207659 (FRE 0210464)
Regular
May 21, 2025

Earl Meyers vs. Fresno Unified School District, CNA Claims Plus

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) June 9, 2021, Joint Findings of Fact, Award, and Opinion on Decision. The WCJ had found the applicant, Earl Meyers, to be 100% permanently totally disabled due to multiple industrial injuries precluding him from vocational rehabilitation and competing in the open labor market. Defendant, Fresno Unified School District, petitioned for reconsideration, arguing misapplication of Labor Code sections 4662 and 4663 regarding apportionment and insufficient evidence for total disability. The Board, reviewing medical and vocational expert opinions, concluded that the defendant failed to provide substantial medical evidence for apportionment of the applicant's work restrictions to non-industrial causes, thereby upholding the 100% permanent total disability finding.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardJoint Findings of FactAwardOpinion on DecisionPetition for Reconsiderationvocational rehabilitationopen labor marketpermanent total disabilityapportionmentLabor Code Section 4662
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Forsythe v. New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services

Plaintiff Earl Forsythe, a pro se litigant, filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against the New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS), alleging racial discrimination in violation of Title VII. Forsythe, a security guard employed by Tristar Patrol Services, claimed that DCAS and its employees discriminated against him based on his race by causing his transfer from desirable posts at DCAS-managed facilities to less favorable ones, disrupting his childcare schedule. DCAS moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not Forsythe's direct employer and that Forsythe failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination or an inference of discriminatory motive. The court determined that a factual issue existed regarding DCAS's "joint employer" liability if a transfer was racially motivated. However, the court found no admissible evidence to suggest that Forsythe's transfers were racially motivated, thus failing the "inference of discrimination" element of his prima facie case. Consequently, DCAS's motion for summary judgment was granted, and Forsythe's Title VII claim was dismissed.

Employment DiscriminationRace DiscriminationTitle VIISummary JudgmentJoint Employer DoctrineAdverse Employment ActionPrima Facie CaseMcDonnell Douglas FrameworkBurden-ShiftingPretext
References
40
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 01026 [180 AD3d 505]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 13, 2020

Lind v. Tishman Constr. Corp. of N.Y.

Plaintiff Earl Lind Jr. was injured while operating an articulating lift during construction of the World Trade Center's Vehicle Security Center, when the lift skidded on a sludge-covered ramp and crashed. Plaintiffs sought partial summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) claims, which the Supreme Court denied. On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, modified the order, granting partial summary judgment to plaintiffs on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim. The court found defendants, including Tishman Construction Corporation, liable as statutory "agents" of the project owner, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, due to their broad responsibility for job site safety. Plaintiff's testimony established prima facie that the lift was a safety device whose failure proximately caused his elevation-related injury.

Construction site injuryWorkplace safetyLabor LawStatutory agentSummary judgmentAppellate DivisionPersonal injuryElevation riskWorld Trade CenterConstruction management
References
2
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07168 [189 AD3d 785]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 02, 2020

Fernandez v. Conklin

The plaintiff, Daniel N. Fernandez, commenced an action to recover damages for personal injuries after being struck by a vehicle operated by Earl E. Conklin, who had just completed delivering newspapers for Local Media Group, Inc. The plaintiff sought to recover damages from Local Media Group, Inc., under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Local Media Group, Inc. moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not Conklin's employer. The Supreme Court denied the motion. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, finding that the defendant failed to establish, prima facie, that it had no relationship with Conklin or that Conklin was an independent contractor.

Personal InjuryRespondeat SuperiorIndependent ContractorSummary JudgmentVicarious LiabilityAppellate ReviewOrange CountyNewspaper DeliveryEmployer-Employee RelationshipScope of Employment
References
7
Case No. ADJ7371382
Regular
Jun 02, 2014

EARL SMITH vs. TIME WARNER CABLE; CHARTIS, administered by ACE USA

This case involves a worker claiming psychiatric injury. The defendant seeks to dismiss the claim based on the "good faith personnel action" defense under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration because the administrative law judge (WCALJ) failed to address the elements of this defense. The WCAB rescinded the previous findings and returned the case for further proceedings, requiring the WCALJ to specifically address whether the personnel actions were lawful, nondiscriminatory, and in good faith, and if they substantially caused the injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric injuryLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Good faith personnel actionPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJPanel Qualified Medical ExaminerPredominant causeSubstantial cause
References
3
Case No. ADJ4408692 (SJO 0255474)
Regular
Sep 02, 2012

JORGE ACEVEDO vs. EARL ADAMS TILE & PLASTER, INC., ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final order that did not determine substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB further denied the Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted. The applicant's claims were therefore dismissed, and removal was denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightLiabilityWCJ's ReportPrejudiceIrreparable HarmInadequate Remedy
References
10
Case No. ADJ8038967
Regular
Oct 23, 2015

EARL GROGAN III vs. CUPERTINO ELECTRIC, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. This action was taken to allow further study of the factual and legal issues involved, ensuring a complete understanding of the record for a just and reasoned decision. All future correspondence related to the petition must be filed directly with the Commissioners of the Appeals Board, not district offices or through EAMS. Pending this decision, WCJs cannot act on any proposed settlements.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCupertino ElectricZurich American Insurance CompanyADJ8038967San Francisco District OfficeStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual IssuesLegal IssuesJust and Reasoned Decision
References
1
Case No. ADJ7350398
Regular
Feb 13, 2012

ROGELIO LIMA vs. MICHAEL ROLFING, EARL ROLFING, STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY

This case involves Rogelio Lima's workers' compensation claim against Michael Rolfing. The core dispute was whether Lima qualified as Rolfing's employee, specifically if he worked the minimum 52 hours in the 90 days prior to his injury. The Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) found that Lima was an employee, calculating sufficient hours based on testimonial and documentary evidence. Rolfing petitioned for reconsideration, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied it, affirming the WCJ's credibility findings and decision. The WCAB adopted the WCJ's report and rationale, thereby upholding the finding of employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRogelio LimaMichael RolfingEarl RolfingState Farm Fire & Casualty CompanyADJ7350398Pomona District OfficePetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 26 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