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. AHM 90917 AHM 90918
Regular
Jul 11, 2007

ANGEL SOSA vs. D.W. FOODS, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, VILLANOVA INSURANCE

This case concerns a dispute over reimbursement between an insurer, Everest, and the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA), which is handling claims for a liquidated insurer, Villanova. The Board denied Everest's petition, upholding a prior award for reimbursement from Everest to CIGA. However, the Board granted CIGA's petition to amend the award to include Villanova Insurance as a party defendant.

CIGAEverest National Insurance CompanyVillanova Insuranceliquidationreconsiderationreimbursementbill review chargesjoint and several liabilitycumulative traumadenied due process
References
0
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 07554 [132 AD3d 500]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2015

Bridge Street Contracting Inc. v. Everest National Insurance

This case addresses an insurer's disclaimer of coverage due to late notice of claims. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified a lower court order, declaring that Everest National Insurance Company has no duty to defend or indemnify Bridge Street Contracting Inc. in the underlying action. The court ruled that Everest properly disclaimed coverage without needing to demonstrate prejudice, as it was not participating in the defense when Bridge Street was served with the claims. Arguments regarding waiver of the late notice defense and antisubrogation were rejected. CastlePoint Insurance Company's motion to intervene was also denied as academic.

Insurance CoverageLate NoticeDisclaimer of CoverageSummary JudgmentDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyAntisubrogationInterventionAppellate DivisionContract Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 1995

National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. State Insurance Fund

Plaintiff National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA (National Union) initiated a declaratory judgment action against The State Insurance Fund (SIF) to recover defense and settlement costs. These costs were expended on behalf of Regional Scaffolding and Hoisting Co., Inc., a mutually insured party in an underlying personal injury action. The Supreme Court initially denied National Union's motion for summary judgment and ruled in favor of SIF. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, concluding that the antisubrogation rule did not apply in this context. Consequently, it determined that National Union and SIF were co-insurers for Regional Scaffolding's common-law liability. The court granted National Union's motion for summary judgment in part, declaring SIF's duty to reimburse National Union for one-half of the reasonable settlement and defense costs, and remanded for a trial to ascertain these amounts.

Antisubrogation RuleDeclaratory JudgmentSummary JudgmentInsurance Coverage DisputeCo-Insurer LiabilityDefense Costs ReimbursementSettlement CostsEmployer's LiabilityComprehensive General LiabilityThird-Party Action
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. American Re-Insurance Co.

The case revolves around a dispute between National Union Fire Insurance Company and American Re-Insurance Company regarding a pollution exclusion clause in a reinsurance policy. National Union sought reimbursement from American Re after settling claims where employees were exposed to metalworking fluids. American Re denied coverage, arguing its pollution exclusion applied. The court, applying Ohio law, found American Re's pollution exclusion ambiguous due to its broad language and its intended purpose of covering environmental contamination. Consequently, American Re's motion for summary judgment was denied, and National Union's motion to strike American Re's defense was granted, requiring American Re to "follow the fortunes" of National Union.

ReinsurancePollution Exclusion ClauseContract InterpretationFollow the Fortunes DoctrineSummary JudgmentInsurance CoverageAmbiguity in ContractsOhio State LawDiversity JurisdictionIndustrial Contamination
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 28, 1991

North River Insurance v. United National Insurance

This appellate decision addresses the apportionment of liability between North River Insurance Co. and United National Insurance Company arising from a settlement for an injured employee. The court clarified that North River, as the workers' compensation carrier, is solely responsible for its waived lien, reversing a lower court's finding. It further determined that both insurers' "other insurance" clauses called for pro rata contribution, not equal shares, for the $588,245 settlement payment and defense costs. The court calculated specific shares for each insurer and ruled that North River is entitled to interest from the original payment date in 1982. The Supreme Court's order was thus modified to reflect these findings.

Insurance disputePro rata contributionEquitable apportionmentWorkers' compensation lienDefense costsOther insurance clausesSettlement apportionmentInterest calculationAppellate decisionInsurer liability
References
10
Case No. ADJ2480026
Regular
Aug 26, 2011

CHAD IMES vs. SCENARIO DESIGNS, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, POWER PAYROLL, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a prior ruling and ordered Everest National Insurance Company to reimburse CIGA for benefits paid to the applicant. The Board found that Everest was "other insurance" available under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9) because its insured, Scenario Designs, Inc., employed the applicant on the date of injury. This decision clarifies that reimbursement to CIGA does not alter the original award and aligns with statutory limitations on CIGA's liability. Everest is now obligated to reimburse CIGA and administer future benefits.

CIGAEverest National Insurance CompanyLegion Insurance CompanyScenario DesignsPower PayrollInc.other insurancereimbursementdate of injurygeneral-special employment
References
16
Case No. ADJ7539480
Regular
Sep 20, 2011

GARY KREFT vs. CELESTRON, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Everest National Insurance Co.

This case concerns a cumulative injury claim where the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted Everest National Insurance Co.'s Petition for Removal. The WCAB amended a prior order joining Everest and other carriers, clarifying that Labor Code section 5500.5(a) limits liability for cumulative injuries to employers/insurers covering the year immediately preceding the date of injury or last exposure. As the date of injury/exposure was not yet determined and appeared to be the last day of employment, only the carriers covering that final year (CompWest and Hartford) were ordered joined. Everest was removed as a party defendant pending further determination.

Petition for RemovalLabor Code section 5500.5(a)cumulative injurylast injurious exposurejoinder of partiesWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boarddate of injuryrepetitive job dutiesCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGA
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Insurance

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., the general contractor, commenced an action against its subcontractor's insurer, National Fire & Marine Insurance Company, seeking a declaration of coverage. Home Depot, individually and as assignee of Westward Contracting, Inc., sought to compel National Fire to defend and indemnify it as an an additional insured in an underlying action, and to indemnify Westward. The Supreme Court denied Home Depot's discovery motion, granted National Fire summary judgment declaring Home Depot was not an additional insured, and denied National Fire's motion to dismiss Home Depot's claims as Westward's assignee for lack of standing and for summary judgment on the indemnification obligation to Westward. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's order, finding Home Depot was not an additional insured and that the assignment to Home Depot was valid and did not relieve National Fire of its indemnification obligation to Westward.

Insurance CoverageAdditional InsuredIndemnificationSummary JudgmentStandingAssignment of ClaimsSubcontractor LiabilityGeneral ContractorCommercial General Liability PolicyAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. ADJ2599827 (LAO 0802863) ADJ3258052 (LAO 0802864) ADJ4519810 (LAO 0802865)
Regular

GONZALO SIS vs. MGM CONVERTERS, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a dispute over contribution between two insurance companies, Everest National Insurance Company and California Indemnity Insurance Company (CIIC), regarding applicant Gonzalo Sis's workers' compensation claim. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the arbitrator's decision ordering CIIC to reimburse Everest. The WCAB found the record incomplete and lacking substantial evidence, particularly regarding proof of service and the arbitrator's reliance on conflicting medical reports. The matter was returned to the trial level for selection of a new arbitrator and the preparation of a proper record, including clear findings of fact and evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardArbitrationContributionCumulative TraumaCompromise and ReleaseSubstantial EvidenceTimelinessProof of ServiceRecord CompletenessMinutes of Hearing
References
7
Case No. LAO 0860371, LAO 0831137, LAO 0834273
Regular
Jul 11, 2008

CESAR MAGANA vs. NORCO INDUSTRIES, INC., ACCA for EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves Everest National Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration of an arbitrator's decision denying its claim for contribution from State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF). The arbitrator found Everest was not entitled to contribution for temporary disability or vocational rehabilitation benefits. The appeals board affirmed the arbitrator's award, determining that Everest failed to establish that SCIF was liable for a cumulative trauma injury, which is a prerequisite for contribution under Labor Code section 5500.5.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardcontributiontemporary disability indemnityself-procured medical treatmentvocational rehabilitation benefitsQualified Injured Worker (QIW)cumulative trauma injuryspecific injury
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 13,019 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