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. ADJ3040750 (SJO 0246172) ADJ2425570 (SJO 0246173)
Regular
2010-03-00

HAI DUONG vs. RGW CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order denies reconsideration and dismisses removal in the case of Hai Duong versus RGW Construction and State Compensation Insurance Fund. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report and recommendation, finding no grounds to overturn the prior decision. The Board also accepted the petitioner's late verification. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration is denied, and the removal is dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissing RemovalReport and RecommendationAdministrative Law JudgeDenying ReconsiderationLate VerificationState Compensation Insurance FundRGW ConstructionADJ3040750
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zong Mou Zou v. Hai Ming Construction Corp.

The plaintiff, an owner and employee of Jian Li Construction, Inc., sustained personal injuries after falling 10 to 13 feet due to the collapse of sheet metal decking at a construction site. He initiated an action against the general contractor, Hai Ming Construction Corp., and site owners 62 Maspeth Avenue, LLC, and Danbro, LLC, alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1), which the Supreme Court, Kings County, denied. On appeal, the order was reversed on the law. The appellate court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) and that it was a proximate cause of his accident. The defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the plaintiff's actions as the sole proximate cause or his status as a recalcitrant worker. Consequently, the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability was granted.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor Law ViolationSummary Judgment MotionAppellate Court DecisionLiability DeterminationProximate CauseRecalcitrant Worker DefenseWorkplace SafetyStatutory Interpretation
References
7
Case No. LAO 0850232, LAO 0850233, LAO 0850234
Regular
Mar 14, 2008

HAI QING HUANG vs. CHUNG KING RESTAURANT, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) denied Hai Qing Huang's petition for reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report as the basis for the denial. The Board noted a minor clerical error where the WCJ's report incorrectly referenced the "Division of Workers' Compensation" instead of the "Workers' Compensation Appeals Board" in its headings, and ordered this correction to be made. The denial of reconsideration stands based on the existing record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDenial of ReconsiderationWCJ ReportJudicial AuthorityOriginal JurisdictionDelegated PowersInitial DeterminationsReconsideration PetitionDivision of Workers' CompensationStatutory Authority
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2007

Hai Ming Lu v. Jing Fong Restaurant, Inc.

Plaintiffs, members of the wait staff at Jing Fong Restaurant, Inc., filed an action alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL) concerning minimum wage, overtime, gratuity retention, uniform reimbursement, and retaliation, alongside a breach of contract claim. The defendants, Jing Fong Restaurant, Inc. and six associated individuals, moved for summary judgment. The Court granted summary judgment, dismissing claims related to retaliation, uniform cleaning costs, breach of contract, and the argument that retaining banquet service charges violated NYLL § 196-d, citing New York appellate precedents. However, the motion was denied for claims alleging the illegal use of the gratuity pool to pay restaurant expenses, improper tip credit usage under federal and state law, and management interference in tip distribution. The Court found that genuine issues of material fact remained for trial on these latter points.

Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)New York Labor Law (NYLL)Minimum WageOvertime ViolationsGratuitiesTip PoolingService ChargesUniform ReimbursementRetaliationSummary Judgment
References
14
Case No. ADJ7626627
Regular
Jul 08, 2014

ALEJANDRA GONZALEZ vs. THANG VI DUONG, INC., STATE FARM INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal because the lien claimants failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The petitioners did not adequately establish that the information they sought to protect qualified as a "trade secret" under California law, which is a prerequisite for invoking such a privilege. Therefore, removal was deemed an extraordinary remedy not warranted in this case. The Board adopted the reasoning of the administrative law judge's report recommending denial.

Petition for RemovalAppeals BoardWCJ ReportSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationTrade Secret PrivilegeUniform Trade Secrets ActPrima Facie ShowingProtective Order
References
6
Case No. ADJ1479326 (ANA 0411799) ADJ7233578
Regular
Oct 07, 2014

JONATHAN DUONG vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board overturned a WCJ's decision to exclude sub rosa surveillance video. The Board found no legal basis for excluding the video obtained in a mobile home park parking lot and a grocery store, as the applicant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in those public areas. The Board determined that the defendant would suffer significant prejudice from the exclusion, justifying removal of the case. Therefore, the sub rosa video was ruled admissible and may be provided to medical evaluators.

Sub rosa videoremovalreconsiderationadmissibilityinvasion of privacyreasonable expectation of privacycivil liabilityworkers' compensation fraudmedical-legal evaluatorworkers' compensation appeals board
References
20
Case No. ADJ1503980 (GRO 0034241)
Regular
Mar 24, 2010

HAI GRIFFIN vs. CALIFORNIA MEN'S COLONY EAST, SCIF STATE EMPLOYEES EXNARD (Adjusting Agency)

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration, finding their prior order was not a final decision and thus not subject to reconsideration. The Board also denied the defendant's petition for removal, upholding their authority to develop the record further. This was based on inconsistencies and lack of explanation in the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) reports regarding the applicant's impairment. The AME will be provided with the complete formal DEU rating and a discussion of substantial medical evidence principles to issue a supplemental report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderDiscoveryMandatory Settlement ConferenceAgreed Medical EvaluatorDEU RatingPermanent Disability
References
17
Case No. ADJ7018865
Regular
Jul 01, 2013

AMY NGOC NGO vs. HAI ONG, INC. dba T.N. JANITORIAL SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding that an applicant's injury was not compensable. The applicant, a janitor, claimed injury while assisting her supervisor with landscaping at the supervisor's private residence. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's findings, which found the applicant's testimony regarding being scheduled for work on the day of injury lacked credibility and was not corroborated. Furthermore, the applicant's off-duty activity at her supervisor's home did not provide any benefit to the employer, thus not falling within the course of employment.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeCredibilityLabor Code § 3202.5Preponderance of the EvidenceCourse of EmploymentOff-Premises InjurySpecial Mission ExceptionCommercial Traveler Doctrine
References
7
Showing 1-8 of 8 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