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. ADJ6853853
Regular
Oct 05, 2012

KYB FUGFUGOSH vs. SAN QUENTIN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a finding that San Quentin State Prison committed serious and willful misconduct. The applicant, an inmate kitchen worker, sustained a right shoulder injury on June 18, 2008, after being ordered to work despite presenting medical documentation of his injury and post-surgical condition. The Board upheld the Administrative Law Judge's finding that prison officials' failure to acknowledge and act on the applicant's medical limitations constituted a reckless disregard for his safety, proximately causing his injury. The employer's arguments regarding perjured testimony and newly discovered evidence were rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSan Quentin State PrisonState Compensation Insurance Fundserious and willful misconductadmitted injurykitchen workerarthroscopic acromioplastyrotator cuff tearsfailure to reportinmate request for interview
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State Employment Relations Board v. Christ the King Regional High School

The New York State Employment Relations Board initiated a proceeding to enforce its order against Christ the King Regional High School, which mandated good-faith bargaining with the Lay Faculty Association and reinstatement of teachers. The School challenged this order on First Amendment grounds, specifically citing the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, arguing for an absolute exemption from the New York State Labor Relations Act. The Supreme Court and Appellate Division ruled in favor of the Board. The Court of Appeals affirmed these decisions, concluding that the Act, being a neutral and generally applicable regulatory measure, did not violate the First Amendment rights of the religious school in its labor relations with lay faculty. The court also upheld the reinstatement of teacher Gaglione, finding insufficient evidence of religious entanglement to preclude it.

First AmendmentFree Exercise ClauseEstablishment ClauseLabor LawCollective BargainingReligious SchoolsLay Faculty RightsEmployment DisputesJudicial ReviewAdministrative Order Enforcement
References
19
Case No. ADJ4653074 (BAK 0152415)
Regular
Oct 03, 2013

ROBERT HUFF vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CDCR - CORCORAN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

This case involves Robert Huff's workers' compensation claim against the State of California, CDCR - Corcoran State Prison. The defendant filed a petition for reconsideration of a previous decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted this petition because they need more time to thoroughly review the factual and legal issues. This action is taken to ensure a just and reasoned decision after further study and potential proceedings. All future filings related to this case must be submitted in writing directly to the WCAB Commissioners' office, not to any district office or via e-filing.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGrantedCorcoran State PrisonLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundCase Number ADJ4653074Opinion and OrderStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal Issues
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. State of New York

The United States sued the State of New York and several state entities, including SBOE, SUNY, and CUNY, alleging violations of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA). The core issue was whether state-funded Disabled Student Services (DSS) offices at public colleges and universities, including SUNY and CUNY campuses and community colleges, must be designated as mandatory voter registration agencies (VRAs) under 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-5(a)(2)(B). The State defendants argued these offices were not 'primarily engaged' in serving persons with disabilities, and that the NVRA did not apply to them. The Court rejected the defendants' arguments regarding subject matter jurisdiction and the interpretation of the NVRA, citing legislative intent and prior circuit court decisions. The Court concluded that DSS offices at all SUNY and CUNY campuses and their respective community colleges are indeed state-funded programs primarily engaged in providing services to persons with disabilities, and therefore must be designated as mandatory VRAs. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was granted.

National Voter Registration Act (NVRA)Voter Registration Agencies (VRAs)Disabled Student Services (DSS)State-funded programsPublic universitiesCommunity collegesFederalismSummary judgmentDeclaratory reliefInjunctive relief
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sharif v. New York State Education Department

Plaintiffs, consisting of ten high school students and two organizations, filed an action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the State Education Department (SED) and Commissioner Thomas Sobol. They alleged that New York's exclusive use of SAT scores for Empire and Regents scholarships discriminates against female students, violating the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause and Title IX. The Court had previously granted a preliminary injunction preventing the use of SAT scores alone for 1989 scholarships. Plaintiffs then moved for class certification, proposing a class of all female high school seniors in New York state applying for these scholarships. The Court, finding that the proposed class met all requirements under Rule 23(a) (numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation) and Rule 23(b)(2), granted the motion for class certification. The Court rejected the defendants' argument of internal class conflict, stating it was illusory.

Class ActionGender DiscriminationSAT ScoresMerit ScholarshipsEqual ProtectionTitle IXPreliminary InjunctionEducation LawFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 23Judicial Review
References
24
Case No. ADJ9714802, ADJ10132748
Regular
Apr 12, 2016

GINA CRANE vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because the administrative judge's order granting a new PQME panel was an interlocutory procedural decision, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the defendant's supplemental petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm that would justify this extraordinary remedy. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation judge's report.

PQME panelPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJfinal orderinterlocutorysubstantive rightliabilitythreshold issueprocedural
References
6
Case No. ADJ7807167
Regular
Feb 18, 2014

GREGORY THOMPSON (Deceased), SVETLANA THOMPSON (Dependent) vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CDCR - HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSTION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

This case concerns Gregory Thompson's workers' compensation claim, with his dependent Svetlana Thompson as applicant. The defendant sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the petition for reconsideration to allow further study of the factual and legal issues. All future filings in this matter must be submitted in writing to the WCAB Commissioners' office, not to any district office or via e-filing.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONSTATUTORY TIME CONSTRAINTSFACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUESJUST AND REASONED DECISIONOFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONERSELECTRONIC ADJUDICATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND
References
0
Case No. ADJ8578354
Regular
Jan 27, 2014

KURT SCHWARZ vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, Legally Uninsured, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the defendant's contention that the original award of 30% permanent disability should have been apportioned. The Board found Dr. McCoy's apportionment opinion deficient for lacking sufficient detail and reasoning, thus not constituting substantial evidence. Consequently, the Board rescinded the findings related to permanent disability and apportionment, returning the matter for further development of the record. The Board also addressed the applicability of Labor Code section 4658(d) concerning permanent disability benefit adjustments, noting potential issues with notice and evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardStationary EngineerIndustrial InjuryCervical SpinePermanent DisabilityApportionmentQualified Medical EvaluatorNonindustrial CausationLabor Code Section 4658(d)Medical Opinion
References
11
Case No. ADJ13254756
Regular
Aug 05, 2025

MARK EVANS vs. CORCORAN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE EMPLOYEES

Applicant Mark Evans sustained injuries during employment at Corcoran State Prison, leading to a WCJ order for medical treatment. Defendant petitioned for reconsideration, arguing the Utilization Review (UR) decision denying the treatment was timely and challenging the WCAB's jurisdiction over the medical necessity dispute. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration, classifying the WCJ's order as a final threshold order. The Board deferred a final decision, ordering further review of the merits and the entire record.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationUtilization ReviewTimelinessRequest for AuthorizationDubon IIFinal OrderThreshold IssueLabor Code Section 4610Medical Treatment
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Strehle v. United States

Seaman Richard Frances Meyer died on a United States Navy vessel due to entrapment in ropes from a malfunctioning winch. His administratrix, Loretta Strehle, sued the United States under the Public Vessels Act, Jones Act, and Death on the High Seas Act, alleging negligence and unseaworthiness. The court found the United States liable, citing the uncorrected defects in the winches and their "deadman" safety feature. The court rejected the claim of Meyer's contributory negligence. Plaintiff was awarded $28,600 for loss of income to Meyer’s dependents (his four sisters) and $50,000 for Meyer's pain and suffering prior to death, totaling $78,600.

Admiralty LawJones ActDeath on the High Seas ActPublic Vessels ActMaritime NegligenceVessel UnseaworthinessWrongful DeathPain and SufferingLoss of SupportComparative Negligence
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 9,175 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