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. 708648/15
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2026

Rojas v. 616 First Ave., LLC

Plaintiff Victor Rojas was injured after falling nine feet on a construction project when a piece of wood shifted, despite wearing a self-retracting lifeline that extended too far. Rojas and his wife sued 616 First Avenue, LLC (owner) and JDS Construction Group, LLC (general contractor) under Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6). The Supreme Court granted Rojas's motion for summary judgment on liability and denied the defendants' cross-motion to dismiss. The Appellate Division affirmed both orders, finding Rojas established prima facie entitlement to judgment due to inadequate safety equipment and a violation of 12 NYCRR 23-1.16(b), which mandates fall distance not exceeding five feet. The court also upheld JDS's designation as a general contractor based on its contractual duties.

Labor LawWorkplace SafetyConstruction AccidentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewFall from HeightSafety DevicesGeneral Contractor LiabilityOwner LiabilityIndustrial Code Violation
References
13
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 02194
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 28, 2018

Rojas v. 1000 42nd St., LLC

Josefina Rojas, a cleaner, sued 1000 42nd Street, LLC, the owner of a multi-tenant residential building in Brooklyn, for personal injuries after allegedly slipping and falling on cardboard in the basement while performing her duties on September 21, 2014. The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment. However, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the lower court's order and granted the defendant's motion. The Appellate Division held that the risk of slipping on cardboard was inherent in the plaintiff's work, which involved cleaning and removing garbage from the basement. The court affirmed that a landowner's duty to a worker is to provide a safe place to work, but not to guard against hazards inherent in the worker's specific tasks or those readily observable, thereby finding the defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.

premises liabilityslip and fallsummary judgmentlandowner dutysafe place to workinherent hazardcleaning workerappellate divisionreversalnegligence
References
7
Case No. ADJ911613 (POM 0261246)
Regular
Apr 04, 2017

ESMERALDA ROJAS REBOLLO vs. SINGING OAKS RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted and incorporated the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report, finding no grounds to overturn the prior decision. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration is denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEsmeralda Rojas RebolloSinging Oaks Retirement CommunityState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationDenying PetitionWCJ reportAdjudicationCase Number ADJ911613Administrative Law Judge
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rojas v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester

Plaintiff Sandra Rojas sued the Diocese of Rochester and Pastor Peter Enyan-Boadu, alleging hostile environment discrimination and retaliation based on sex under Title VII and the New York Human Rights Law, along with state common-law claims for assault and battery. Rojas, employed as a Coordinator for Hispanic Migrant Ministry, claimed sexual advances by Enyan-Boadu and subsequent termination after reporting a hostile environment. Defendants moved to dismiss, citing the 'ministerial exception' and insufficient pleading for retaliation. The court denied dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction but granted dismissal of the retaliation claims without prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6), allowing Rojas to amend her complaint.

Employment DiscriminationSexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliation ClaimsMinisterial Exception DoctrineReligious OrganizationsFirst Amendment RightsRule 12(b)(1) MotionRule 12(b)(6) MotionTitle VII Civil Rights Act
References
32
Case No. ADJ7037475
Regular
Oct 04, 2018

JESUS ROJAS vs. GAY AND LESBIAN COMMUNITY CENTER, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Jesus Rojas's petition for reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's award of 81% permanent disability for his admitted industrial spine injury. Rojas argued for 100% permanent disability based on an Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion of inability to return to the labor market and contended apportionment to non-industrial factors was unsubstantiated. The Board found the apportionment to pre-existing congenital stenosis was supported by medical evidence and that the *Hikida* case did not apply as Rojas's disability was not directly caused by the effects of medical treatment necessitated by both industrial and non-industrial factors. Furthermore, the Board held that Labor Code section 4662(b) does not create an independent pathway to permanent total disability.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Labor Code section 4656Labor Code section 4658Labor Code section 4662(b)Hikida v. Workers' Comp. Appeals. Bd.non-industrial factors
References
2
Case No. SRO 0135117
Regular
Aug 08, 2007

CARLOS ROJAS vs. OGLETREE'S, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns applicant Carlos Rojas's entitlement to temporary disability indemnity following a cervical spine, right shoulder, and right arm injury. The defendant sought to limit payments based on Labor Code section 4656(c)(1), arguing the 104-week period began with the first compensable disability. The Appeals Board affirmed the lower decision, holding that the 104-week limit is triggered by the date of the *first payment* of temporary disability, not the date of the injury or when benefits were initially owed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationTemporary Total DisabilityLabor Code section 4656(c)(1)OverpaymentExpedited HearingFindings and OrderTemporary Disability IndemnityCompensable Temporary DisabilityCommencement of Payment
References
1
Case No. VNO 380127
Regular
Jul 19, 2007

HERLINDA ROJAS vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the issue of Travelers Insurance Company's liability for contributions towards applicant Herlinda Rojas' cumulative trauma injury. The Board found no error in the original order joining Travelers as a party defendant, recognizing LACMTA's right to seek contribution for benefits paid. Ultimately, the Board rescinded the previous Findings of Fact and returned the case for further proceedings to determine Travelers' potential contribution.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLACMTATravelers Insurance Companycumulative traumaequitable estoppelres judicatacollateral estoppeljoindercontributionpermanent disability
References
6
Case No. ADJ16022807
Regular
Aug 08, 2025

ISRAEL MORALES ROJAS vs. CHRISTENSEN BROTHERS GENERAL ENGINEERING, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Applicant Israel Morales Rojas petitioned for reconsideration of a WCJ's July 7, 2023, decision that denied his entitlement to a specific post-acute residential rehabilitation program. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the matter. While the reconsideration was pending, the Board was advised that a proposed settlement had been reached. Consequently, the Board rescinded the WCJ's original decision and returned the case to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the proposed settlement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and OrderBurden of ProofReasonableness of TreatmentCasa Colina Transitional Living CenterInterdisciplinary Post-Acute Residential Rehabilitation ProgramSettlementRescindedReturned to Trial Level
References
0
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 03468 [161 AD3d 132]
Regular Panel Decision
May 10, 2018

Matter of Machado

This case involves reciprocal discipline against attorney Esmeralda Machado. The Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department sought to discipline Machado based on a New Jersey Supreme Court order permanently barring her from appearing pro hac vice due to unauthorized practice of law, dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. Machado had repeatedly failed to pay required fees, continued to practice in New Jersey despite her pro hac vice admission terminating, misused another attorney's letterhead, and made false statements in a divorce proceeding. The New York Appellate Division, First Department, granted the motion for reciprocal discipline, suspending Machado from the practice of law in New York for two years, effective June 11, 2018. The court found her misconduct in New Jersey would also constitute misconduct in New York.

Attorney MisconductUnauthorized Practice of LawReciprocal DisciplineProfessional EthicsSuspensionNew Jersey Disciplinary ProceedingsFalse StatementsFraudDishonestyAppellate Division First Department
References
10
Case No. ADJ18189986
Regular
Aug 15, 2025

ESMERALDA SANCHEZ vs. KELLERMEYER BERGENSONS SERVICES, LLC; CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICES; ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Esmeralda Sanchez claimed industrial injury to multiple body parts while employed as a janitor for Kellermeyer Bergensons Services, LLC. The WCJ initially found the lien claimant, Spectrum Medical Group, failed to prove injury AOE/COE, awarding only $1,000 for a specific service date and excluding Dr. Nia's medical-legal report due to non-compliance with Labor Code § 4628. Both the defendant (Kellermeyer Bergensons Services, LLC, Constitution State Services, Zurich American Insurance Company) and the lien claimant petitioned for reconsideration, citing errors in the WCJ's findings regarding admissible evidence and the need for further record development. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted both petitions, deferring a final decision to allow for further review of the merits and the entire record in light of applicable statutory and decisional law.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantAOE/COELabor Code § 4628Medical Legal ReportSubstantial EvidenceAdmissibilityIndustrial InjurySpectrum Medical Group
References
21
Showing 1-10 of 39 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