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. Index No. 500294/2018 Appeal No. 16497-16498-16499 Case No. 2022-00247, 2022-00958, 2022-01285, 2022-02741
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 16, 2023

Matter of Edgar V.L.

Alison L. initiated proceedings to appoint an Article 81 guardian for her incapacitated brother, Edgar V.L., alleging financial exploitation by Rachida Naciri, who later married Edgar and entered into a prenuptial agreement. Judy S. Mock was appointed temporary guardian and Gary Elias as counsel. Concerns arose when Mock and Elias failed to investigate the marriage and financial transactions. A special guardian, Lissett C. Ferreira, was subsequently appointed to investigate these matters. The Supreme Court removed Mock and discharged Elias due to conflicts of interest and dereliction of fiduciary duties, appointing successor guardian and counsel. The Appellate Division affirmed these orders, ruling that Alison L. had standing and that the court's actions regarding the appointments and removals were a proper exercise of discretion. The court also dismissed an appeal as moot.

Incapacitated personGuardianshipFinancial exploitationPrenuptial agreementFiduciary dutiesAttorney misconductSpecial guardianArticle 81Due processAppellate review
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 1999

Edgar v. Montechiari

Bruce Edgar sustained injuries when a patio roof he was working on collapsed. He and his wife initiated an action against the homeowners, Carlos and Monica Montechiari, asserting claims under Labor Law § 240 (1), § 200, and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court of Suffolk County initially granted the homeowners' motion to set aside a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs and dismissed the complaint against them. On appeal, this decision was affirmed. The appellate court found that the one- and two-family homeowners were exempt from liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) because their involvement did not constitute direction or control over the work, being limited to aesthetic design and general supervision typical of an ordinary homeowner.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentPatio Roof CollapseHomeowner LiabilityLabor Law ExemptionConstruction AccidentAppellate DecisionJury Verdict Set AsideSuffolk CountyPremises Liability
References
7
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 06436 [211 AD3d 77]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 15, 2022

Matter of Loew

This case concerns Alison Loew's petition for guardianship over her incapacitated brother, Edgar V. Loew, due to alleged financial exploitation by Rachida Naciri. The Appellate Division reviewed the Supreme Court's orders to appoint a special guardian, remove the initial guardian (Judy S. Mock) and discharge counsel (Gary Elias) for failing their fiduciary duties, and appoint successor guardian and counsel. The court found that Mock and Elias neglected to investigate the suspicious marriage and prenuptial agreement between Edgar and Naciri, as well as the financial transactions and Edgar's living situation. The Appellate Division affirmed the removal and discharge, emphasizing the guardian's duty to protect the incapacitated person's interests and uphold court directives.

Guardianship DisputeIncapacitated Persons' RightsFiduciary BreachElder Financial AbuseAppellate Court DecisionRemoval of FiduciariesPrenuptial Agreement ValidityMarriage AnnulmentMental Hygiene Law Article 81Court Appointed Counsel
References
14
Case No. ADJ7850439
Regular
Oct 15, 2012

Edgar Tabo vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT

The applicant, a police officer, injured himself in an off-duty bicycle crash. The Board denied compensation because the applicant failed to establish that his subjective belief of needing to train for an optional bicycle patrol course was objectively reasonable. His off-duty recreational activity did not meet the requirements for an exception to the exclusion for such injuries under Labor Code section 3600(a)(9). Therefore, the applicant takes nothing by way of his claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEdgar TaboCity and County of San Francisco Police DepartmentPermissibly Self-InsuredADJ7850439Oakland District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJindustrial injury
References
12
Case No. ADJ9657364, ADJ8944404
Regular
Dec 22, 2016

EDGAR GAZITUA vs. CARPET PROS, INC., CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Edgar Gazitua's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed untimely. The deadline for filing was October 21, 2016, but the petition was received by the WCAB on October 28, 2016. The WCAB stressed that timely filing requires receipt by the board, not just mailing. Therefore, the WCAB lacked jurisdiction to consider the untimely petition, and would have denied it on the merits if it had been timely.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeDismissalWCABPetition
References
0
Case No. ADJ14871067
Regular
Feb 13, 2023

EDGAR GAMA vs. XTRACTOR DEPOT, LLC, 2020 LONG BEACH, LLC, THE HARTFORD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant was an employee of Xtractor Depot, LLC. The Board gave significant weight to the judge's credibility determination, finding no substantial evidence to warrant overturning it. The Board also noted the petitioner's improper attachment of exhibits to their petition. Ultimately, the applicant's credible testimony and unrebutted exhibits supported the original finding of industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Reconsideration DeniedWCJ Credibility DeterminationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Ostensible AuthorityEmployee StatusXtractor Depot LLCAndrew YoonCannabis IndustryWarehouse Explosion
References
4
Case No. ADJ10112502 ADJ9730487
Regular
Apr 03, 2017

EDGAR RIVERA vs. FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC dba L.A. FITNESS, LIBERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Edgar Rivera's petition for reconsideration. The petition was deemed skeletal and failed to specifically state grounds and evidence. Additionally, the petition was not properly served on all adverse parties, which is a mandatory requirement for dismissal. The Board incorporated the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which would have led to denial on the merits had the procedural defects not necessitated dismissal.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalWCJ ReportLabor Code Section 5902Appeals Board RulesSkeletal PetitionProof of ServiceAdverse PartiesCredibility DeterminationsWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
7
Case No. ADJ9554701
Regular
Nov 02, 2014

EDGAR VILLARREAL vs. ALAMILLO REBAR, INC., OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Edgar Villarreal against Alamillo Rebar, Inc. and its insurer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the petition and the administrative law judge's report. Concluding that the reasons stated in the judge's report were sufficient, the WCAB denied the Petition for Removal.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport of JudgeDenial of RemovalAlamillo RebarOld Republic General InsuranceGallagher Bassett ServicesEdgar VillarrealADJ9554701
References
0
Case No. ADJ1749318 (OAK 0338628)
Regular
Nov 03, 2015

EDGAR PUENTE vs. MACY'S WEST

This case involves Macy's West seeking removal of an order denying their petition for a $500 credit related to a missed QME appointment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal, finding that summary denial of the credit petition would cause prejudice. The Board amended the original order to defer the issue of the credit petition until the applicant's underlying claims are settled or tried. This allows Macy's to present evidence and arguments for the credit at a later, more appropriate stage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalOrder Denying Petition for CreditQME appointmentLabor Code section 5811Petition for Creditmedical-legal costmissed appointment feecompensable consequencehypertension
References
3
Case No. ADJ3107792 (AHM 0148954)
Regular
Apr 09, 2012

EDGAR QUIJADA vs. ORE-CAL CORPORATION, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration that was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) as untimely. The original order was issued on October 18, 2011, but the petition was not filed until November 22, 2011, 35 days later. California law strictly enforces a 25-day deadline for filing such petitions, with this time limit being jurisdictional. The WCAB also noted that even if they had wanted to grant reconsideration on their own motion, the 60-day window had expired before the petition reached their attention. Therefore, the WCAB had no choice but to dismiss the petition due to its tardiness.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitsLien ClaimantAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationService by MailLabor Code
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 21 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