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

Vay v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Plaintiff Emily R. Vay sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying her application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Plaintiff alleged disability due to anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, pervasive development disorder, Asperger's syndrome, and learning disability since January 16, 2014. Her application was initially denied, and after a hearing before Administrative Law Judge William M. Manico, an unfavorable decision was issued on January 21, 2016, which became the Commissioner's final decision after the Appeals Council denied review on May 26, 2017. Before the District Court, both parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiff argued that the ALJ failed to develop the record regarding recent treatment, improperly assessed her credibility, and mischaracterized her impairments, leading to an unsupported Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) finding. The Court, presided over by Judge Elizabeth A. Wolford, granted the Commissioner's motion and denied Plaintiff's motion, finding that the Commissioner's determination was supported by substantial evidence and free from legal error. The Court concluded that the ALJ adequately developed the record, made a reasonable credibility assessment based on conflicting evidence, and properly assessed Plaintiff's impairments and RFC.

Supplemental Security IncomeSocial Security ActDisability BenefitsALJ Decision ReviewResidual Functional CapacityCredibility AssessmentRecord DevelopmentAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderAnxiety DisorderAutism Spectrum Disorder
References
27
Case No. ADJ2711362 (SBA 0085364)
Regular
Oct 02, 2012

EMILY CLAUSEN vs. MCGHAN MEDICAL/INAMED CORPORATION, FIRST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA C/O SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denies Emily Clausen's petition for reconsideration and dismisses her petition for removal. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), finding it sound despite a minor factual error regarding the applicant's age. The WCAB clarified that reconsideration is the proper avenue for challenging a WCJ's final substantive order, not removal. Therefore, both the petition for reconsideration and the petition for removal were denied and dismissed, respectively.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRemovalWCJ reportapplicant's agesubstantive orderadequate remedydismissing Petition for Removaldenying ReconsiderationADJ numbers
References
0
Case No. ADJ4148815 (MON 0343933)
Regular
Nov 05, 2012

EMILY GARCIA vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award, rescinding the original decision. They found applicant sustained an industrial injury to her right ankle and a sleep disorder, but not to her knee, hypertension, or gastrointestinal reflux. The claim for psychiatric injury was deferred due to insufficient evidence regarding the six-month employment requirement. The court also found the treating physician's report on the gastrointestinal reflux lacked substantial medical evidence.

WCABEmily GarciaCity of Los Angelesself-insuredFindings and AwardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryRight AnklePsycheSleep Disturbance
References
10
Case No. SBA 0085364
Regular
Feb 28, 2008

EMILY CLAUSEN vs. INAMED CORPORATION, GENERAL INSURANCE (SAFECO)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board found the trial judge's decision lacked the required explanation of its reasoning and reliance on evidence, failing to meet legal standards for clarity and justification. The matter will be returned to ensure a properly reasoned decision that addresses all relevant legal requirements, including apportionment.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardRescindedLabor Code section 4663ApportionmentFibromyalgiaPermanent DisabilityTemporary DisabilityOpinion on DecisionReport on Reconsideration
References
9
Case No. ADJ2711362
Regular
Jul 07, 2009

EMILY CLAUSEN vs. INAMED CORPORATION, GENERAL INSURANCE (SAFECO)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to correct the permanent total disability indemnity rate from $\$490$ to $\$392.52$ per week. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding of 100% permanent disability due to industrial injury, including fibromyalgia, finding Dr. Salick's opinion substantial evidence. Defendant's due process and apportionment arguments were rejected. The WCAB remanded to the WCJ to clarify the attorney's fee amount and method of payment, specifically how it will be commuted from the lifetime award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryFibromyalgiaPermanent DisabilityApportionmentQualified Medical EvaluatorAgreed Medical EvaluatorTemporary Disability IndemnityAttorney's FeesPetition for Reconsideration
References
18
Case No. ADJ7994035
Regular
Apr 26, 2013

EMILY NOE vs. R\&L CARRIERS, THE HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the applicant's case, affirming the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) finding of a compensable continuous trauma injury. The defendants argued that the applicant's misstatements on a DOT physical form negated her claim. However, the Board found substantial evidence supported the WCJ's decision, giving great weight to the judge's credibility findings. The WCJ determined that the applicant's testimony and medical reports established a compensable injury despite the conflicting DOT physical answers.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedContinuous Trauma InjuryAOE/COEPQMEMedical EvidenceCredibility FindingJob DutiesDOT PhysicalHealth History
References
1
Case No. ADJ7490993
Regular
Jan 08, 2013

JEFFREY BRUMM, Deceased, JULIE BRUMM, ERIN NICOLE BRUMM, EMILY RAE BRUMM, WENDE IRIART, MEGAN ALEXANDRA BRUMM vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, Legally Uninsured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration and removal filed by the applicant in a workers' compensation matter. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because it was not taken from a "final" order that determined substantive rights. The Board also denied the petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted. The WCJ's report and recommendation were adopted and incorporated into the decision.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightInterlocutory OrderRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWCJ's ReportCalifornia Highway Patrol
References
11
Case No. POM 0280813
Regular
Oct 09, 2007

MANUEL SALAZAR vs. U.S. WAREHOUSE TECHNOLOGY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded its previous order granting reconsideration and dismissed Emily Medina's petition. The WCAB found that Ms. Medina, an office manager for the lien claimant Vineyard Injury Center, lacked legal standing to file the petition as she was neither the legal representative nor an aggrieved party. Vineyard Injury Center had been represented by counsel throughout the proceedings regarding its lien claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantReconsiderationFindings and OrderOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleAggrieved partyLegal standingPetition for reconsiderationHearing representativeLabor Code
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Derogatis v. Board of Trustees of Central Pension Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers

Plaintiff Emily DeRogatis sought 100% survivor's benefits from the Local 15 Welfare Fund after her husband's death, alleging breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA. She claimed that an employee, Richard Lopez, provided incomplete advice regarding health insurance options upon retirement, which led her husband not to file retirement papers before his passing. This resulted in her receiving only a 50% survivor's benefit according to the plan terms. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, ruling that Lopez was not acting as an ERISA fiduciary because his responsibilities were determined to be ministerial rather than discretionary. Consequently, the claims against the Local 15 Welfare Fund were dismissed.

ERISAFiduciary DutySummary JudgmentEmployee BenefitsPension BenefitsSurvivor AnnuityMisleading InformationMinisterial FunctionsDiscretionary AuthoritySecond Circuit Law
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re B.H. Children

This case addresses the Family Court's authority to issue an order of protection on behalf of foster care agency employees in a child protective proceeding. MercyFirst, a foster care agency, sought an order of protection against a respondent father to safeguard its caseworkers, L.S. and S.H., from alleged threats and harassment. Presiding Judge Emily M. Olshansky ruled that the Family Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to grant such an order, as New York statutes do not explicitly extend protection to foster care agency employees in this context. Consequently, the agency's motion for an order of protection was denied, and a subsequent motion for contempt related to a temporary order, which the court found void due to lack of jurisdiction, was also denied.

Family Court JurisdictionOrder of Protection AuthorityChild Protective ServicesFoster Care Worker SafetyStatutory Interpretation New YorkContempt of Court GroundsLimited Jurisdiction CourtsLegal StandingAgency Employees RightsJudicial Review of Statutes
References
28
Showing 1-10 of 11 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