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

Spinella v. Town of Paris Zoning Board of Appeals

The respondents moved to dismiss the petition alleging petitioners failed to submit a proposed judgment within 60 days, deeming it abandoned. Petitioners' counsel, a qualified individual with a visual disability under the Americans With Disabilities Act, argued that his impairment constituted 'good cause' for the delay. He sought reasonable accommodation, citing past accommodations for the bar exam and law school, as well as an increased workload due to a lost secretary. The court found that the counsel's visual impairment indeed served as good cause for noncompliance with the established time limits. Consequently, the motion to dismiss was denied, and the proposed judgment was signed, recognizing the extension of time as a reasonable accommodation.

Americans with Disabilities ActADADisability AccommodationJudicial DiscretionProcedural RulesTime LimitsGood CauseVisual ImpairmentAttorney DisabilityCourt Procedure
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 17, 1997

In re the Claim of Mustaqur Rahman

The claimant, employed by a temporary agency for six months, resigned alleging co-worker harassment. He admitted not discussing his concerns with the employer prior to resigning. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found he voluntarily left his employment without good cause, noting that continuing work and reassignment options were available had he informed the employer. The Board's decision was affirmed on appeal, reinforcing that co-worker conflicts do not constitute good cause for leaving employment, especially when the employer is not notified beforehand.

Unemployment InsuranceVoluntary ResignationGood CauseHarassmentEmployer NotificationBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewCo-worker ConflictDisqualificationEmployment Benefits
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Bonilla

Claimant, a postal worker, was arrested for threatening suicide and subsequently required to undergo a psychiatric evaluation by releasing his medical records to determine his fitness for duty. He refused to release these records, which prevented the completion of the psychiatric examination and ultimately led to him not being permitted to return to work. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board then disqualified him from receiving unemployment insurance benefits, ruling that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. This decision was based on the premise that a claimant who fails to take a reasonably required step as a prerequisite to continued employment is deemed to have voluntarily left their job without good cause. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, finding it supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Voluntary separationUnemployment benefitsGood cause for leaving employmentMedical records releaseFitness for dutyPsychiatric evaluationPostal workerDisqualification from benefitsSubstantial evidence
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 05, 2003

In re the Claim of Kohen

The claimant, a social worker, filed a complaint against her employer with the Division of Human Rights alleging religious harassment. Despite continued problems, including a high-risk pregnancy, she resigned in June 2003, citing dissatisfaction with the work environment and unfair treatment. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualified her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits, concluding she voluntarily left without good cause. The court affirmed this decision, reiterating that dissatisfaction with one's working environment does not constitute good cause for leaving employment.

Unemployment BenefitsVoluntary ResignationGood CauseWork EnvironmentHarassmentPregnancyAppealSocial WorkerDissatisfactionUnfair Treatment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Elkan-Moore

The case involves a claimant's appeal from a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which ruled she was disqualified from receiving benefits due to voluntarily leaving her employment without good cause. The claimant, a museum director for five years, contended she resigned due to distress over allegations by a former Board of Trustees president and ongoing harassment from staff. However, the court found that issues with co-workers do not constitute good cause for leaving. An investigation had cleared the claimant of the allegations, and the Board was actively working to resolve the situation and retain her. The court ultimately affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the claimant left her job due to general dissatisfaction with work conditions.

Unemployment InsuranceVoluntary QuittingGood CauseJob DissatisfactionWorkplace HarassmentBoard of TrusteesEmployer-Employee RelationsAppellate ReviewBenefit DisqualificationClaimant Appeal
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 1945

Empire Case Goods Workers Union v. Empire Case Goods Co.

Empire Case Goods Workers Union, on behalf of its members, brought an action against Empire Case Goods Company and Sidney G. Bose to recover vacation pay stipulated in a contract. Empire sold its business to Bose, leading both defendants to deny liability for the vacation pay. The Special Term initially dismissed the complaint against both defendants, reasoning that Empire's employees became Bose's and Bose was not party to the contract. On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal against Bose, finding no implied assumption of Empire's wage structure. However, it reversed the dismissal against Empire, holding Empire liable for the vacation pay as employees were not notified of the change in employer and continued to work under Empire's apparent authority, making Empire responsible under master and servant law.

Vacation PayEmployer LiabilitySuccessor LiabilityEmployment ContractSale of BusinessNotice of TerminationAgency RelationshipMaster and Servant LawAppellate ReviewWage Dispute
References
2
Case No. ADJ2973256 (OXN 0141107)
Regular
Apr 25, 2016

PATRICK STOCKTON vs. THE WATER SYSTEM GROUP, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a dismissal order. The dismissal was based on the lien claimant's failure to appear at a lien conference and the untimeliness and lack of good cause in their subsequent objection. While the objection's timeliness was questioned, the board agreed with the WCJ that a "failed mail procedure" does not constitute good cause for non-appearance. One commissioner dissented, believing the lien claimant's verified assertion of non-receipt of notice should warrant adjudication on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimDismissalNon-AppearanceLien ConferenceObjection LetterUntimelyGood CauseNotice of Hearing
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Howe v. New York State Department of Corrections

The case involves an appeal by a claimant's employer and its workers' compensation insurance carrier challenging a $500 penalty imposed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The Board found that the carrier interposed objections to the claimant's benefits claim without just cause. The appellate court affirmed the penalty, holding that "just cause" under Workers' Compensation Law § 25 (2) (c) requires an objective rational basis and relevant, objective, and reasonable evidence to support controverting a claim. A subjective good-faith belief alone is insufficient. The court found that despite opportunities, the carrier failed to provide factual evidence to disprove the claim, relying instead on supposition and unfounded hope.

Workers' Compensation PenaltyJust CauseCarrier ObjectionsEmployer LiabilityStatutory InterpretationObjective Rational BasisGood-Faith BeliefEvidence RequirementsAppellate ReviewBoard Decision Affirmation
References
2
Case No. ADJ3711106 (MON 0347573) ADJ2131962 (MON 0350490)
Regular
Sep 16, 2010

ELIZABETH JUANILLO NAVARRO vs. JACK IN THE BOX, GALLAGHER BASSETT, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case concerns a lien claimant, Arthur Malkin, D.C., and his representative, Lee Toney, who are challenging a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions. The lien claimant contends he was misadvised and did not receive a necessary report from the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The Board has provided the missing report and granted an additional 10 days for the lien claimant to file further objections to the $250 sanction. Failure to show good cause within this extended period will result in the imposition of sanctions under Labor Code section 5813.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsLien claimantArthur Malkin D.C.Lee ToneyPetition for RemovalWCJ Report and RecommendationPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5813Sanctions
References
0
Case No. ADJ1923491 (MON 0328312) ADJ1637229 (MON 0328313) ADJ1163286 (MON 0333886)
Regular
Jul 24, 2014

EVANGELINA JIMENEZ vs. ADVANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES, REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies a petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report, finding no good cause to set aside the dismissal of a lien. Petitioner was properly served with notice of the lien trial and a Notice of Intention to Submit and Dismiss Lien for failure to appear. An untimely and improperly filed objection did not demonstrate good cause for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardElectronic Adjudication Management Systemlien trialNotice of IntentionSubmit and Dismiss Liencover sheetgood causeset aside dismissaladministrative law judge
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 6,045 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