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

Gonzalez v. Niagara Grinding Wheel, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal regarding a medical malpractice action filed against Richard Goccia. Plaintiff delivered the summons and complaint to the Greene County Sheriff, who served Goccia's wife in Dutchess County after the Statute of Limitations had expired. Goccia moved for summary judgment, arguing the action was time-barred because he neither resided nor worked in Greene County when the summons was delivered. Plaintiff cross-moved, contending diligent efforts were made to ascertain Goccia's whereabouts. The Supreme Court denied Goccia's motion and granted plaintiff's cross-motion. The appellate court affirmed, ruling that despite not being the most efficacious, plaintiff's inquiries to locate Goccia were reasonable, thereby allowing the tolling provision of CPLR 203 (b) (5) (i) to apply.

Statute of LimitationsMedical MalpracticeCPLRSummary JudgmentPersonal JurisdictionService of ProcessAppellate ReviewDue DiligenceTolling Provision
References
1
Case No. ANA 0374544
Regular
Jun 09, 2008

JOHN T. TRAN vs. WMC GRINDING, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES

The applicant, John Tran, seeks reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision that denied penalties for delayed temporary and permanent disability payments. Tran argues the defendant unreasonably delayed payments after he became permanent and stationary, and seeks penalties under Labor Code section 5814. The Board granted reconsideration, vacated the prior decision, and returned the case for further development of the record on the issue of penalties.

ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryLow BackMachinistTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Labor Code Section 5814Penalty
References
1
Case No. ADJ9546016
Regular
Sep 04, 2015

JAMES ISBORN vs. US TOOL GRINDING, INC., ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior June 9, 2015, Findings and Order. This grant is for further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future correspondence related to the petition must be filed with the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not the district office or e-filed. Trial-level documents unrelated to the petition should continue to be filed as usual, but settlements require prompt notification of the WCAB.

IsbornUS Tool GrindingArgonaut InsuranceADJ9546016Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderJune 9 2015statutory time constraintsfactual issueslegal issues
References
0
Case No. ADJ676456 (RIV 0010094) ADJ280975 (RIV 0039757)
Regular
Apr 11, 2016

John Adcock vs. Matrix Science Corp., Pomona Precision Grinding Co., Travelers Insurance, Farmers Insurance Group

The applicant sought reconsideration of WCAB findings that denied industrial injury to his back in two separate cases involving different dates of injury. The WCJ recommended granting the petitions for reconsideration to further develop the record regarding the back injury claim. The Board agreed and granted reconsideration, rescinding the original findings and returning the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. This decision specifically addresses the development of evidence concerning the applicant's alleged back injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAmended Findings of Factindustrial injurygrinder/machinistright handright elbowright kneeback injury
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 12, 2002

D'Amato v. Access Manufacturing, Inc.

The plaintiff, a welder's assistant, sustained personal injuries when his hand was caught in a metal grinding machine at the defendant's Queens manufacturing facility. The plaintiff sued the defendant, a corporation that manufactured metal doors and handrailings. The Supreme Court, Queens County, entered judgment for the plaintiff. On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court erred in precluding a special employment defense under the Workers' Compensation Law, based on the doctrine of law of the case. The appellate court reversed the judgment, holding that the law of the case doctrine was misapplied as the special employment issue had not been previously litigated. A new trial was granted on the issue of liability only, while the jury's findings as to damages were affirmed. The court also noted errors in permitting speculative expert testimony and limiting the defendant's ability to refresh the plaintiff's recollection.

Personal InjurySpecial EmploymentLaw of the CaseAppellate ProcedureEvidentiary RulingsLiabilityDamagesNew TrialJury VerdictCorporate Entity
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Dosztan v. Kraft Foods

The claimant, an assembly line technician, sought workers' compensation benefits for an occupational airway disease, citing exposure to grinding dust, cardboard dust, and heat-shrinking polyethylene fumes at work. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially awarded benefits, a decision affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The employer appealed, contending the Board’s determination lacked substantial evidence and relied on speculative medical opinions. However, the court found sufficient support in the medical reports and testimony of physicians Michael Lax and David Rechlin, who established a causal link between the claimant's condition and workplace exposures. The court emphasized that resolving conflicting medical evidence falls within the Board's purview and that the absence of OSHA violations does not preclude a finding of occupational disease, ultimately affirming the Board’s decision.

Occupational DiseaseAirway DiseaseWorkers' Compensation BenefitsMedical CausationWorkplace ExposureSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewConflicting Medical EvidenceOSHA Compliance
References
9
Showing 1-6 of 6 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