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. ADJ1926394 (POM 0267363)
Regular
Jul 20, 2009

Francisco Costa vs. Ralph's Grocery Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a $100\%$ permanent disability award to Francisco Costa. Defendant Ralph's Grocery Company argued that $20\%$ of the disability should be apportioned to Costa's pre-existing congenital spinal stenosis, citing medical opinions. The Board found that the medical record justified apportionment but lacked sufficient detail on the basis for the physicians' opinions. Consequently, the Board rescinded the award and returned the case to the trial level for further development of the medical record regarding apportionment.

WCABRalph's Grocery CompanyFrancisco Costapermanent disabilityapportionmentcongenital spinal stenosiscauda equina syndromedecompression surgeryQMEsubstantial medical evidence
References
3
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04119 [141 AD3d 43]
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2016

Costa v. State of New York

Claimant Modesto Costa, a construction worker, sustained injuries at Pier 40 due to a collapsing metal beam. Pier 40 is owned by the State of New York but managed by the Hudson River Park Trust. After an initial claim against New York City was dismissed, Costa sought to file a late notice of claim against the State of New York. The Court of Claims denied this motion, asserting the State was not a proper party due to the legislative transfer of legal obligations to the Trust under the Hudson River Park Act. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed this decision, holding that despite retaining record title, the State was not an "owner" for Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) liability purposes. The court reasoned that the Hudson River Park Act, particularly the clause stating the Trust "shall succeed to all...other legal obligations," demonstrated legislative intent to exempt the State from such liability. This intent was further supported by a 2013 amendment requiring the State to indemnify the Trust, indicating that the original Act intended the Trust to bear sole legal responsibility for injuries in the Park. Therefore, the State was not a proper party to the action.

Labor Law liabilityOwner liabilityAbsolute liabilityPublic benefit corporationHudson River Park ActStatutory interpretationLate notice of claimProperty ownershipLessees liabilityGovernmental immunity
References
8
Case No. 534352
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 01, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Francisco Leon

Claimant Francisco Leon, a construction worker, sought workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained on January 30, 2020, after falling from a scaffold. The employer, Monadnock Construction Inc., and its carrier disputed the claim, but a Workers' Compensation Law Judge established the claim, a decision subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The carrier appealed the Board's ruling, contending it lacked substantial evidence. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that the Board holds broad authority in factual determinations, including witness credibility and drawing reasonable inferences from evidence. The court concluded that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that Leon's injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsScaffold AccidentWork-related InjuryAccidental Injury ClaimAppellate ReviewFactual DeterminationsSubstantial Evidence ReviewMedical EvidenceCredibility AssessmentEmployer Liability
References
9
Case No. ADJ8298527
Regular
Mar 30, 2015

BRANDON COSTA vs. WOLSELEY INVESTMENTS, doing business as FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY for HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Brandon Costa's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the judge's report, finding the applicant's testimony regarding providing medical reports to the employer not credible. Because the applicant failed to respond to the employer's request for documentation, his termination was deemed for good cause. Consequently, the applicant is not entitled to temporary disability benefits during periods of temporary partial disability.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility determinationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.admitted industrial injurytemporary disabilitytemporary partial disabilitylight duty worktermination for cause
References
0
Case No. ADJ6591842
Regular
Jan 28, 2013

FRANCISCO LUJAN vs. MAXON INDUSTRIES, INC., CHARTIS COSTA MESA, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

This case involves a worker's compensation claim by Francisco Lujan against Maxon Industries, Inc. The defendant, Maxon Industries, filed a Petition for Reconsideration arguing that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by relying on the medical opinions of Dr. Diane Weiss. The defendant contended Dr. Weiss's reports were not substantial evidence due to perceived discrepancies in symptom severity, lack of psychological testing, alleged ex parte communication, contradiction by another doctor, disregard of videotape evidence, and non-conformity with AMA Guides. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, adopting the ALJ's report which found Dr. Weiss's opinions credible and well-reasoned, supported by the applicant's testimony and corroborated by another medical expert on the critical issue of work capacity. The WCAB also upheld the ALJ's reliance on the vocational expert's report, finding it unrebutted, and found no error in the award of attorney's fees.

Petition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerElectric shockSub rosa videoGAF scorePsychological testingEx parte communicationAMA GuidesVocational expertUniform Reduction Method
References
1
Case No. ADJ1674856
Regular
Dec 29, 2010

BARBARA SOREM-HUGHLETT, BARBARA HUGHLETT vs. VENTURA COUNTY, CHARTIS COSTA MESA

This case involves multiple workers' compensation claims filed by Barbara Sorem-Hughlett against Ventura County and Chartis Costa Mesa. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has issued an Opinion and Order Granting Petition for Reconsideration in these consolidated cases. Therefore, all future communications, objections, and motions related to these claims must be directed to the WCAB's San Francisco office, not any local office, pending a Decision After Reconsideration. The order was filed on December 29, 2010.

Sorem-HughlettVentura CountyChartis Costa MesaPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersRonnie G. CaplaneJames C. CuneoAlfonso J. Moresi
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2014

Costa v. Sears Home Improvement Products, Inc.

Plaintiff Christina Costa sued Sears Home Improvement Products, Inc. and Sears Holdings Corporation for retaliation under Title VII, alleging unlawful termination after engaging in protected activities. Defendants sought summary judgment, asserting that Costa was legitimately fired for falsifying time records. Costa countered with claims of disparate treatment, retaliatory threats, and close temporal proximity between her protected actions and adverse employment events. The court denied Defendants' motion for summary judgment, citing genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether the termination was a pretext for retaliation. All other motions, including Plaintiff's motions for sanctions and to compel, and Defendants' request for Rule 11 sanctions, were also denied.

Employment LawRetaliationTitle VIISummary JudgmentFalsification of RecordsProtected ActivityDisparate TreatmentCausal ConnectionPretextSanctions
References
56
Case No. ADJ7927883
Regular
May 22, 2015

JEFF JANZEN vs. CITY OF COSTA MESA, COSTA MESA FIRE DEPARTMENT

This case involves a fire captain's cumulative trauma claim for injuries to multiple body parts, including sinuses, lungs, and back. The employer, City of Costa Mesa, argued the claim was time-barred under Labor Code §5412. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board upheld the administrative law judge's decision, finding the applicant lacked knowledge of the cumulative nature of his injury until consulting an attorney. Therefore, the Board determined the statute of limitations did not bar the claim, as his disability was not known to be industrially caused until shortly before filing.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJEFF JANZENCITY OF COSTA MESAPermissibly Self-InsuredFindings Award and Orderindustrial injurysinuseslungsskinneck
References
3
Case No. ADJ9919242
Regular
Apr 04, 2017

JAMES KIRCHER vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City and County of San Francisco's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the finding that a firefighter sustained an industrial injury to his heart and circulatory system when he experienced atrial arrhythmias during a mandatory work treadmill test. Although the Agreed Medical Examiner initially stated he wouldn't term the event an "injury," he later opined the arrhythmias were work-related and caused in part by job stress, leading to the applicant being taken off work. The Board concluded this constituted an injury under the Labor Code, resulting in temporary disability.

Atrial arrhythmiasTreadmill stress testAgreed Medical ExaminerWork mandated health checkIndustrial injuryTemporary disabilityPermanent disabilityOccupational medicineCardiologyLabor Code section 3208
References
0
Case No. ADJ9298777
Regular
Aug 14, 2017

JUAN FRANCISCO LARIOS vs. VALLEY FLEET CLEAN, SUSSEX INSURANCE, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted applicant Juan Francisco Larios' petition for reconsideration of a May 31, 2017 decision. This grant is to allow further study of the factual and legal issues involved to ensure a just decision. All future correspondence regarding the petition must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco and not through district offices or e-filing. The WCAB notes that trial-level documents unrelated to the reconsideration should still be filed as usual, but settlement documents require prompt notification to the Appeals Board.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionOffice of the CommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Rules of the Administrative Director
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 555 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