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. ADJ591293 (GRO 0031424) ADJ3541062 (GRO 0031102)
Regular
Jan 15, 2013

GENE FREITAS vs. THE KROGER COMPANY DBA RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, Permissibly Self-Insured, and Administered and Adjusted By SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Gene Freitas's petition for reconsideration of a November 2, 2012 decision. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and a need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The Board requires more time to fully understand the record and render a just decision. Consequently, all future communications regarding this case must be filed in writing with the Board's Commissioners' office.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionFurther ProceedingsCommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 1996

Freitas v. New York City Transit Authority

Plaintiff Antonio Freitas, an employee of Rite-Way Interior Removal, Inc., was injured when a dumpster tipped over, crushing his hand at a subway construction site. He sued the general contractor, Lehrer & McGovern, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law sections 200 and 241 (6). The IAS Court initially granted summary judgment to the defendant on the Labor Law § 241 (6) claims but denied it for the Labor Law § 200 claim. On appeal, the Supreme Court, New York County, modified the decision. The court reinstated the claim based on Labor Law § 241 (6) and 12 NYCRR 23-1.28 (b), finding it to be a specific, positive command mandating a distinct standard of conduct. The court affirmed the denial of dismissal for the Labor Law § 200 claim, citing factual issues regarding the general contractor's retained control and supervision over the work site.

Construction AccidentWorkplace SafetySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewIndustrial Code ViolationsGeneral Contractor LiabilityDumpster AccidentNon-delegable DutyCommon-law NegligenceControl and Supervision
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Freitas v. GYPSUM FLOORS OF NEW YORK, INC.

Marli Freitas sued Gypsum Floors of New York, Inc. and Richard W. Phillips for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and New York State Human Rights Law. She alleged intentional discrimination, disparate treatment based on her Brazilian national origin, a hostile work environment due to comments about her accent, and retaliation for opposing the discrimination. Defendants denied the claims, asserting performance issues and claiming Freitas took a voluntary leave. The court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding the reasons for Freitas' termination and whether she was actually fired.

DiscriminationNational OriginHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationTitle VIIHuman Rights LawSummary JudgmentEmployment LawFederal CourtNew York Law
References
3
Case No. ADJ591293 (GRO 0031424) ADJ3541062 (GRO 0031102)
Regular
Oct 16, 2014

GENE FREITAS vs. THE KROGER COMPANY DBA RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

This case concerns an applicant's appeal challenging his permanent disability rating. The applicant argued his vocational expert demonstrated 100% disability, seeking to rebut the standard 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the initial findings, holding the applicant failed to prove his industrial injury was the sole cause of his inability to participate in rehabilitation. The WCAB emphasized that factors like lack of education or general aptitude, rather than solely the industrial injury, must be demonstrably absent for a successful rebuttal under *LeBoeuf* principles.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGene FreitasThe Kroger CompanyRalphs Grocery CompanySEDGWICK CMSOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleVocational ExpertOgilvie
References
2
Case No. ADJ3483133 (LBO 0389333)
Regular
Jan 31, 2011

GENE BROWN vs. PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, OLD REPUBLIC

In this case, the defendant sought reconsideration of an award finding a left shoulder injury and $12\%$ permanent disability for the applicant, Gene Brown. The core dispute involved a clerical error in the permanent disability indemnity rate, which was initially awarded at $\$270.00$ per week instead of the correct statutory rate of $\$230.00$. While the WCJ amended the award to correct the indemnity rate, this correction did not proportionately adjust the attorney fees. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded both the original and amended decisions, and returned the matter to the trial level for recalculation of attorney fees and a new decision.

Permanent disability indemnityReconsiderationClerical errorIndemnity rateAmended Findings and AwardLabor Code sections 4658(d)Labor Code sections 4660(d)Offer of modified workAttorney feesWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. ADJ11414789
Regular
Oct 02, 2020

MARK FREITAS vs. MC CAFFREY CONSTRUCTION &FRAMING INC., REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded its prior decision in *Freitas v. McCaffrey Construction* due to a proposed settlement reached by the parties while the case was pending reconsideration. The matter has been returned to the trial level for the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) to review the settlement. If the WCJ approves the settlement, the case will proceed accordingly; otherwise, the original decision may be reinstated. This order does not constitute a final decision on the merits of the issues originally under reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMark FreitasMcCaffrey Construction & Framing Inc.Redwood Fire and Casualty Insurance Co.Berkshire Hathaway Homestate CompaniesADJ11414789Sacramento District OfficeOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationProposed SettlementRescinded Decision
References
0
Case No. ADJ6843599
Regular
Dec 03, 2012

MICHAEL FREITAS vs. COUNTY OF SONOMA

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the Findings and Order striking the Agreed Medical Evaluator's report was an interim procedural order, not a final decision on the merits. The Board also denied the Petition for Removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm to the defendant from the order. The defendant's contention that the striking of a supplemental report was improper was not persuasive, as the AME's own delay contributed to the issue. A subsequent order corrected a clerical error regarding the date of the Board's initial decision.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Rule 38Untimely ReportStriking AMEInterim Procedural OrderFinal OrderLabor Code Section 5310
References
11
Case No. ADJ2505068
Regular
May 28, 2013

MARIA FREITAS vs. SAVEMART SUPERMARKETS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied SaveMart Supermarkets' petition for reconsideration of an award finding the applicant's right leg injury to be a compensable consequence of her industrial back injury. The WCAB adopted the judge's report, which found the applicant's testimony credible, supported by medical opinions noting prior leg weakness and difficulty walking. The judge found that a contemporaneous surgeon's report, which stated the applicant missed a step, was less persuasive than the applicant's consistent testimony and supporting medical evidence. The WCAB upheld the judge's credibility determination and the finding that the leg injury was causally related to the admitted back injury.

Compensable Consequence InjuryCredibility FindingWCJ Report AdoptionTibia FractureCumulative Back InjuryMechanism of InjuryLower Extremity WeaknessAntalgic GaitSworn TestimonyMedical Opinion
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Roa v. King Gene Cab Corp.

The court denied the motion to dismiss the appeal without costs, determining that while the appellant's standing in the workers' compensation proceeding is an issue for the appeal itself, the appellant clearly possesses standing to appeal the board's decision which denied its motion to reopen. This decision ensures the appeal process can continue to address the substantive issues, including the appellant's participation rights.

Motion to DismissAppealStandingWorkers' CompensationMotion to ReopenBoard DecisionProcedural
References
0
Case No. ADJ8558683
Regular
Jun 28, 2013

DARRYL FREITAS vs. HANSEL PRESTIGE, TOWER SELECT INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final order, specifically a Notice of Hearing, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the defendant's request for removal, finding no evidence of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board admonished the defendant's attorney for filing what bordered on a frivolous petition, which improperly interrupted the proceedings. Consequently, the matter proceeded as if no reconsideration or removal had been sought.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionSubstantive RightRemovalWCJ ReportSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmSanctionsNotice of Hearing
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 27 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