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. ADJ2519091 (LAO 0824930) ADJ4160066 (LAO 0824931) ADJ188382 (LAO 0828971)
Regular
Aug 18, 1941

MARIA MARXUACH vs. WESTIN BONAVENTURE HOTEL, ZURICH NORTH AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in this case, upholding the judge's decision. Discovery closed by operation of law on September 12, 2007, and the applicant's attorneys failed to demonstrate due diligence in listing crucial medical reports as exhibits prior to this closure. Despite numerous continuances and attempts to amend the exhibit list, discovery was never formally reopened. The Board adopted the judge's reasoning that the applicant did not establish why the exhibits could not have been presented with reasonable diligence before discovery closed.

Mandatory Settlement ConferencePre-trial conference statementdiscovery closureadministrative law judgePetition for Reconsiderationreopen discoverydue diligenceexhibition listWCJ reportWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ7934540 ADJ7934544
Regular
Jan 13, 2020

JUAN LOPEZ vs. JOHN A. VAN LEEUWEN DAIRY, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to lien claimants after a WCJ excluded their exhibits due to failure to submit exhibit lists with the Pretrial Conference Statement (PTCS). The WCAB found that lien claimants demonstrated good cause, citing excusable neglect by their representative and the constitutional mandate for substantial justice and due process. Therefore, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's order and returned the matter for further proceedings, allowing lien claimants to amend the PTCS with their exhibit lists. This decision prioritizes a decision on the merits over procedural omissions in this case.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and Orderslien claimantsWCJPretrial Conference Statement (PTCS)excusable neglectFox v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.substantial justicedue process
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 1991

Bonilla v. New York City Civil Service Commission

In a CPLR article 78 proceeding, the petitioner challenged a determination disqualifying him from a civil service eligible list for a sanitation worker position due to a psychiatric disorder. The Supreme Court, New York County, granted the respondents' cross motion to dismiss the petition, citing the petitioner's failure to commence the proceeding before the eligible list expired. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, relying on established case law such as Matter of Deas v Levitt, which mandates dismissal if a challenge to an eligible list determination is not initiated prior to the list's expiration. This ruling emphasizes the procedural requirement for timely legal action concerning civil service eligible lists.

Civil Service LawEligible ListDisqualificationPsychiatric DisorderNervous BreakdownTimeliness of PetitionExpiration of Eligible ListProcedural DismissalJudicial ReviewAppellate Affirmation
References
12
Case No. ADJ394613 (VNO 0530712) ADJ2266356 (VNO 0530710)
Regular
Apr 01, 2016

MARIA ESTRELLA vs. NATIONAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal to a lien claimant after a judge excluded four exhibits. The WCAB found that two of the excluded exhibits, representing certifications and financial interest notifications, were sufficiently listed on the Pre-Trial Conference Statement. Therefore, the WCAB admitted these two exhibits into evidence, amending the judge's prior order. The remainder of the judge's order, excluding the other two exhibits, was affirmed.

Petition for RemovalLien ClaimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJExhibitsPrejudiceIrreparable HarmPre-Trial Conference StatementServiceNotification of Certification
References
1
Case No. ADJ7618189
Regular
Nov 26, 2012

RUBEN OROZCO vs. EXACT STAFF, INC.; TOWER/NSM INSUREX, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP

This case involves lien claimants Anderson Chiropractic and Santana Lopez seeking reconsideration of an order disallowing their liens. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because a crucial exhibit, Exhibit 6, was incomplete in the record. Lien claimants are ordered to file a complete copy of Exhibit 6 within 10 days to allow the Board to properly review the case. This action is necessary for the Board to study the facts and applicable law concerning the disallowed liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien claimantsFindings and OrdersDisallowed liensExhibit 6Administrative law judgeWCJSupplemental pleadingSan Francisco
References
0
Case No. ADJ7522823
Regular
Nov 21, 2016

JEFFREY GOTTLIEB vs. KITCHEN FOR EXPLORING FOODS, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and admitted lien claimant's Exhibits 15 and 16, overturning their exclusion by the trial judge. The Board found the exhibits were listed with sufficient specificity to avoid substantial prejudice to the defendant. Consequently, the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, deferring the final determination of the liens for Southern California Mental Health and Hepps Prescription Pharmacy. This decision aims to achieve substantial justice and prioritize a hearing on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersPre-Trial Conference StatementLien ClaimantPrimary Treating PhysicianCompromise and ReleasePanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial JusticeAdmitted Exhibits
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Soljan v. Bahou

Budgetary cutbacks in 1976 led to staff reductions in the Office of Drug Abuse Services (ODAS). Appellants then certified a preferred list of affected employees to fill vacancies, including Rehabilitation Counselor Trainee positions within the Department of Mental Hygiene. Petitioners initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, arguing that the inclusion of this title was arbitrary due to dissimilar job duties. Special Term agreed and annulled the determination. On appeal, the court affirmed the annulment, finding the job duties insufficiently comparable and the appellants' reasons for not ordering a civil service examination for provisional appointees unconvincing. However, the judgment was modified to reverse the directive that petitioner Soljan be continued in employment, recognizing that provisional appointees lack full civil service protection.

Civil Service LawPreferred ListRehabilitation Counselor TraineeBudget CutsStaff ReductionsJob ComparabilityCPLR Article 78Judicial Review ScopeProvisional AppointeesCivil Service Examination
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 1949

United States v. Foster

Defendants indicted for conspiracy to overthrow the government challenged the jury selection process in the Southern District of New York. They alleged systematic exclusion of the poor, minorities, women, and political affiliates, arguing that property qualifications and low juror fees were unconstitutional. Judge Medina conducted a six-week trial, reviewing extensive evidence from 1940-1949 jury records and witness testimonies. The court found no deliberate, willful, or systematic discrimination, concluding that the defendants failed to meet their burden of proof. The judge overruled the challenge and denied all motions, emphasizing the broad discretion in jury selection and rejecting the concept of proportional representation for jury lists.

Jury selection challengeSystematic exclusionJury discriminationEconomic statusRacial minoritiesWomen's rightsPolitical affiliationGrand jury panelPetit jury venireConstitutional challenge
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gallagher v. City of New York

This appeal addresses whether the decision to prioritize a promotional list for firefighter candidates, composed of Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) and paramedics within the Fire Department, over an open competitive examination list was arbitrary and capricious or violated the New York State Constitution's Merit and Fitness Clause. The Fire Department and the Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) determined that EMS personnel had sufficient overlap in responsibilities with firefighters to warrant a promotional pathway. The Supreme Court initially sided with the petitioner, the Uniformed Firefighters Association, finding the preference arbitrary. However, the appellate court reversed, deferring to DCAS's expertise and finding their policy of exhausting promotional lists before open competitive lists rational and consistent with Civil Service Law, even if it meant appointing lower-scoring candidates from the promotional list first due to their prior experience.

Promotional ExamCivil ServiceMerit and Fitness ClauseFirefighter AppointmentsEMTsParamedicsOpen Competitive ExamPublic EmploymentJudicial ReviewCivil Service Law
References
16
Case No. ADJ1410076
Regular
Jul 01, 2011

ROBERTO CERVANTES vs. HIJI BROS, INC., ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration. The lien claimant sought reimbursement for interpreting services but failed to present any evidence beyond its own bill and lien at trial. The Board found that merely sending documents or listing exhibits does not equate to admission into evidence, and the claimant waived its issues by not raising them during the proceedings. Therefore, the lien was disallowed, and the defendant was awarded restitution for payments made to the lien claimant.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderDisallowed LienRestitutionHearing RepresentativeMandatory Settlement ConferenceTrialExhibitBurden of Proof
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 522 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