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. ADJ6628362
Regular
Dec 23, 2010

MAURICE CARR vs. OTIS GLADNEY, Dba AAA MOTORCYCLE ESCORT SERVICE

This case involves a worker injured while employed as a motorcycle escort driver. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award to correct a clerical error. Specifically, the WCAB amended the award to ensure the employer, Otis Gladney dba AAA Motorcycle Escort Service, was explicitly named as the liable party, as was originally intended. The WCAB affirmed all other aspects of the original findings and award concerning the applicant's injuries and benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeMotorcycle escort driverUninsured employerIndustrial injuryScapula injuryElbow injuryForearm injury
References
6
Case No. ADJ8079708
Regular
May 06, 2013

JAMES AZBILL vs. FATORS MOTORCYCLES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend a prior finding, affirming the claim is not barred by the statute of limitations. However, the Board reversed the finding that the applicant was entitled to the presumption of compensability under Labor Code section 5402(b). This presumption requires the filing of a DWC-1 claim form, which was absent in this case. The Board will return the matter to the trial level for further proceedings on deferred issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFators MotorcyclesState Compensation Insurance FundJames AzbillADJ8079708Opinion and OrderReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJStatute of Limitations
References
0
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 02530 [160 AD3d 1189]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 12, 2018

Perkins v. County of Tompkins

Christopher Perkins was involved in a motorcycle accident after borrowing a motorcycle from his sister, Josephine Hines. Kathleen Perkins, as his guardian, sued Robert Zimmer Sr., whose vehicle Perkins veered away from. Zimmer then filed a third-party action against Hines for negligent entrustment, arguing she should not have loaned Perkins the motorcycle. Hines moved for summary judgment, contending she showed due care and that an injured party cannot claim negligent entrustment against the entrustor, but the Supreme Court denied her motion. The Appellate Division affirmed, finding Hines' testimony raised a factual question about her knowledge of Perkins' competency to operate the motorcycle and affirming that a third-party claim for contribution or indemnification based on negligent entrustment is valid.

Negligent EntrustmentMotorcycle AccidentSummary JudgmentThird-Party ActionContribution ClaimIndemnification ClaimCompetence of OperatorDriver's LicenseMaterial Question of FactAppellate Division
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hennings v. Town of Hempstead

Claimant, a parks department laborer, was injured in a motorcycle accident while returning from lunch. He had used his motorcycle to travel to work and then left it to go to lunch in a coworker's car. Upon returning, he crashed his motorcycle on a public road. The Workers' Compensation Board disallowed his claim, finding that he was on his lunch hour and not performing any work duties when the accident occurred. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, agreeing that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of his employment.

Workers' CompensationMotorcycle AccidentCourse of EmploymentLunch Break InjuryAffirmed DecisionBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewLaborerParks DepartmentPersonal Commute
References
1
Case No. ADJ7039301
Regular
Mar 16, 2011

ROBLY HART vs. LA JOLLA PACIFIC/DRR NEFF & ASSOCIATES, OAKS RIVER INSURANCE/BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

This case concerns Robly Hart's workers' compensation claim for an injury sustained in a motorcycle accident. The applicant was a construction consultant who used his motorcycle for work, traveling between home, job sites, and interviews. The primary dispute centers on whether the accident occurred during the course and scope of his employment, with conflicting evidence regarding his activities and timeline leading up to the incident. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report that found the applicant's testimony lacked credibility due to inconsistent statements and timeline discrepancies.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Findings and OrderCourse of EmploymentConstruction ConsultantBuilding InspectorMotorcycle TravelJob Sites
References
1
Case No. ADJ2897160
Regular
Dec 13, 2010

JAMES HUTCHRAFT vs. PAN MOTORCYCLES, INC., UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS GROUP

In this workers' compensation case, James Hutchcraft sought penalties and attorney's fees for alleged unreasonable delays in authorizing a surgical consultation and cervical surgery. The Appeals Board denied his petition for reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's decision. The Board found that Hutchcraft failed to meet his burden of proving any delay by the defendant in authorizing the consultation or the surgery. Lacking evidence of a delay, the issue of reasonableness was not reached.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Sections 58145814.5Unreasonable DelayAuthorizationOrthopedic SurgeonCervical SurgeryBurden of ProofMedical Treatment
References
2
Case No. ADJ8610560
Regular
Sep 19, 2013

William Brown (Deceased), Annette Brown vs. SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS

This case involves a widow's petition for workers' compensation death benefits for her truck driver husband who died in a motorcycle accident after leaving work. The administrative law judge denied the claim, finding it barred by the going and coming rule. The applicant argued the special risk exception applied due to hazardous road conditions and a quantitatively greater risk compared to the general public. The majority of the Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the risks were not exclusive to employment.

Going and Coming RuleSpecial Risk ExceptionDeath BenefitsMotor Vehicle AccidentIndustrial InjuryTruck DriverNegligencePublic RoadZone of DangerHazard
References
10
Case No. ADJ2112759 (ANA 0406243)
Regular
Feb 22, 2009

Matt Todd vs. INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a finding that applicant Matt Todd sustained an industrial injury during his commute. The Board determined that Todd's motorcycle accident en route from the Union Hall to the employer's premises was barred by the "going and coming" rule. Todd failed to establish that the trip was an extraordinary mission or that the commute involved a special risk distinct from the general public. Furthermore, the Board found insufficient evidence that the Union Hall acted as the employer's agent in dispatching Todd.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryMotorcycle AccidentCommuteUnion HallCasual LaborerGoing and Coming RuleSpecial Mission DoctrineSpecial Risk Exception
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 29, 2001

Biganini v. Gallagher

Mario Biganini sought to review a determination by John C. Gallagher, Commissioner of the Suffolk County Police Department, which revoked his pistol license. The revocation was based on findings that Biganini lacked "good moral character" due to his membership and officer role in the Long Island chapter of the Hell's Angels Motorcycle Club. Evidence presented at the hearing linked Hell's Angels to criminal activities and indicated Biganini was not candid about his involvement. The court upheld the Commissioner's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious. Furthermore, the court ruled that the revocation did not violate Biganini's constitutional right to freedom of association.

Pistol license revocationGood moral characterHell's Angels Motorcycle ClubFreedom of associationPolice CommissionerAdministrative reviewSubstantial evidenceArbitrary and capriciousConstitutional rightsCPLR Article 78
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of McMicking v. City of Niagara Falls

The case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision denying occupational disease and death benefits to the claimant's decedent. The decedent, a former motorcycle policeman, suffered a cerebral concussion and fractures in 1979, and two heart attacks in 1980 and 1981, ultimately leading to his death. While the claimant's doctor argued a causal link between the decedent's stressful employment and coronary artery disease, the employer's cardiologist found no connection. The Workers' Compensation Board reversed an initial award, concluding that the decedent's work did not involve undue physical or emotional stress, a finding that was affirmed on appeal given the Board's authority to resolve conflicting medical opinions.

Occupational DiseaseDeath BenefitsCausally Related DisabilityCoronary Artery DiseaseHeart AttackPolice EmploymentWork-Related StressConflicting Medical EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionAppellate Review
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 20 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