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

In re the Arbitration between Thompson & S.L.T. Ready-Mix, Division of Torrington Industries, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from a Supreme Court order confirming an arbitration award. The petitioner, an employee laid off during a winter slowdown, filed a grievance after workers with lower seniority were recalled. An arbitrator found the employer, the respondent, violated the collective bargaining agreement's seniority provisions and ordered the petitioner to be made whole. The Supreme Court confirmed this award. On appeal, the court affirmed the arbitrability of the dispute due to the respondent's waiver and upheld the arbitrator's authority. However, the appellate court found the damages portion of the award lacked specificity and required a rehearing before the arbitrator for a final determination of the amount. The court also denied the petitioner's claim for counsel fees.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementSeniority Rights DisputeWaiver of ArbitrabilityArbitrator's AuthorityDamages AssessmentRemittal for ClarificationConfirmation of AwardVacation of AwardCounsel Fees Denied
References
7
Case No. ADJ7264206
Regular
Jan 12, 2017

SERGIO RUAN vs. SUPER MERCADO MI TIERRA, FARMERS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a "final" order, decision, or award. The Board clarified that a final order must determine substantive rights or liabilities, or a fundamental threshold issue. In this case, the WCJ's decision only awarded attorney fees to the applicant's counsel, and the defendant was not aggrieved by this specific award. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationAggrieved PartyFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueAttorney FeesWCJ ReportDismissed PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSergio Ruan
References
4
Case No. ADJ7828356
Regular
Dec 27, 2018

ELIZABETH ZAVALA vs. EMPLOYMENT SOLUTIONS, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT FOR CASTLEPOINT NATIONAL, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

This case involves lien claimant petitions for reconsideration of two WCJ orders. The first petition was dismissed as moot because the challenged Findings and Award was subsequently rescinded. The second petition was also dismissed because the Order Rescinding Findings and Award for Lien Claim is not a final order, and reconsideration is only permitted from final decisions. Therefore, both petitions for reconsideration were dismissed as they were procedurally improper.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardElizabeth ZavalaEmployment SolutionsTristar Risk ManagementCastlepoint NationalCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationADJ7828356Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardOrder Rescinding Findings and Award
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Kyne & Molfetas

This case involves an appeal from an order confirming an arbitration award, which was subsequently reversed and remanded to Special Term. The court mandated a hearing to determine two critical aspects: first, whether the arbitration contract was formed between the petitioner labor union and the respondent as an individual or on behalf of a corporate entity; and second, whether the respondent received due notice of the arbitration. The decision emphasizes that the court, not the arbitrator, must decide on the existence of a valid contract and proper notice. Furthermore, even if these conditions are met, the matter must be remanded to the arbitrator to clarify the ambiguity of the award, which directed payments to unidentified individuals, rendering it imperfectly executed and not a final and definite award as required by the Civil Practice Act.

ArbitrationContract ExistenceNotice RequirementAmbiguity in AwardRemandSpecial TermLabor UnionRespondent IdentityCivil Practice ActProcedural Reversal
References
4
Case No. ADJ7736993, ADJ8633868
Regular
Jul 29, 2016

HUGO IBARRA vs. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of the Joint Findings and Award. The applicant's argument focused on alleged errors in the WCJ's Opinion on Decision regarding advances, not the Findings and Award itself. The Board clarified that reconsideration is only available for final orders determining substantive rights or liabilities. Since the Findings and Award did not address advances or offsets, and no final order on that issue exists, the petition was denied. Any dispute regarding advances must first be litigated at the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardPermanent DisabilityDisability IndemnityAttorney's FeesOpinion on DecisionAdvancesOffsetsTrial Level
References
3
Case No. ADJ11665754
Regular
Mar 17, 2020

MELISSA RIVERA vs. AURORA LAS ENCINAS, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final order. A valid petition must address a "final" order that determines substantive rights, liabilities, or a fundamental threshold issue. In this case, the January 10, 2020 decision was a "Findings and Order," not a final award. Therefore, the defendant was not an aggrieved party from a final decision, and their petition was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationAggrieved PartyFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiability DeterminationThreshold IssueFindings and OrderAwardAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ6478466
Regular
Jan 14, 2013

CLIFFORD MIMS vs. SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA TRANSIT DISTRICT

Applicant's attorney sought reconsideration and removal of a Findings and Award, arguing the judge erred by ordering reimbursement of excess attorney fees due to a reduction in the disability award. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration because no final order regarding attorney fees had been issued. The Petition for Removal was denied as the attorney failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board noted the attorney would have an opportunity to seek reconsideration if a final order on fees is later issued.

ReconsiderationRemovalPetitionFindings and AwardAttorney FeesWCJDeferred IssuesFinal OrderAggrieved PartySubstantial Prejudice
References
5
Case No. ADJ7552724, ADJ7584841
Regular
Sep 17, 2013

AGUSTIN NAVARRO vs. ALLIED WASTE OF SACRAMENTO, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration of a prior order that itself granted reconsideration. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because reconsideration can only be sought from a final order, decision, or award, not from interlocutory procedural orders. An order granting reconsideration without resolving the underlying issues is not considered final. Therefore, the petition challenging the order granting reconsideration was dismissed as procedurally improper.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderLab. Code§ 5900Granting ReconsiderationDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ7552724ADJ7584841
References
0
Case No. ADJ3688325 (SBR 0323875) ADJ1445844 (SBR 0323876) ADJ4577184 (SBR 0323877)
Regular
Sep 22, 2009

MARIA FUENTES vs. WAKEFIELD ENGINEERING, AIG COSTA MESA, LUMBERMEN'S MUTUAL CASUALTY CO.

This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of an order that reinstated a prior workers' compensation award. The defendant argued the order erroneously reinstated the award after it was dismissed from one of the underlying cases and was not given due process. The Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petition, finding the order at issue was not a final order and thus not subject to review under Labor Code section 5900. Furthermore, the Board denied a petition for removal, concluding the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, as it remains liable under the joint award and can seek contribution from another insurer.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Setting Aside Findings and AwardVocational Rehabilitation BenefitsQualified Injured WorkerSpecific InjuryCumulative TraumaInsurance CoverageParty Defendant
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 100, Transport Workers Union v. New York City Transit Authority

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, which had granted a petition to vacate an arbitration award. The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement between the parties concerning expedited arbitration of safety issues related to "One Person Train Operation" (OPTO). When the petitioner refused to agree to hearing dates without discovery, the respondent filed a grievance, leading to a ruling by an Impartial Arbitrator directing adherence to scheduled dates. The Supreme Court initially vacated this arbitration award, but the appellate court reversed, holding that courts lack jurisdiction to review interlocutory arbitration decisions and can only intervene after a final determination in the arbitration proceeding.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceExpedited ArbitrationOne Person Train OperationJurisdictionInterlocutory DecisionAppellate ReviewCPLRVacatur of Award
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 27,300 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