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. 2020 NY Slip Op 00977 [180 AD3d 466]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 11, 2020

People v. Cueva

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the judgment convicting defendant Wilmer Cueva of criminally negligent homicide and reckless endangerment. Cueva, a construction foreman, was found to have personally ordered unsafe actions resulting in a fatal trench collapse. The court rejected the defendant's unpreserved legal insufficiency claim and found the verdict supported by overwhelming evidence. Furthermore, the court found no error in the jury instructions, the admission of gruesome autopsy photos, or the denial of defendant's motion to suppress his statements.

criminally negligent homicidereckless endangermenttrench collapse fatalityconstruction safety violationsforeman liabilityappellate affirmationsufficiency of evidencejury instruction reviewautopsy photo admissibilitysuppression motion
References
5
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 05905
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 23, 2018

Cuevas v. Baruti Constr. Corp.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed two orders from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, relating to a construction accident case. Plaintiff Gidar Manuel Cuevas was injured while attempting to lower a heavy roof cutting machine from a building's roof without adequate safety devices, specifically a hoist. The Supreme Court had granted Cuevas partial summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and quashed a nonparty subpoena. Defendant Baruti Construction Corp. appealed, citing a coworker's affidavit, but the Appellate Division found the coworker's statements consistent and the accident clearly related to an elevation risk, thus upholding the lower court's decisions.

Construction AccidentLabor LawSummary JudgmentElevation-Related RiskSafety DevicesAppellate ReviewWitness TestimonyAffidavit ConsistencyProximate CauseSubpoena Quash
References
12
Case No. ADJ9143778 ADJ9845461 ADJ9845465 ADJ9143777
Regular
Nov 27, 2017

IGNACIO MOLINA vs. FRESNO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Ignacio Molina's Petition for Reconsideration because it failed to meet statutory requirements for specificity and legal support. Molina sought reconsideration based on his employer's alleged failure to provide medical treatment for his left eye. However, his petition did not challenge the specific findings of the previous decision nor provide detailed legal grounds. The Board advised Molina that he could pursue medical treatment issues by filing a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalWCJJoint Findings of FactOrders and Opinion on DecisionLabor Code section 5902WCAB Rule 10842(a)Cal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10846
References
0
Case No. ADJ8261287
Regular
Sep 17, 2014

IGNACIO VIDRIOS LUNA vs. WAWONA PACKING, ZURICH INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Ignacio Vidrios Luna's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed more than 20 days after the administrative law judge's decision, exceeding the jurisdictional time limit. Since the decision was personally served, there was no mailing extension. Even if timely, the WCAB would have denied the petition on its merits. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyLabor Code section 5903JurisdictionalPersonally ServedOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseAttorney's FeesWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeWCJ Report
References
7
Case No. ADJ9389953
Regular
Mar 08, 2019

IGNACIO BARRON vs. PAK’S CABINETS, SOUTHERN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended its prior decision regarding Ignacio Barron's claim against Pak's Cabinets. The amended decision affirmed the original award of permanent disability at 40%, payable at $230.00 per week for 201 weeks, totaling $46,230.00, less attorney fees. Crucially, the amendment acknowledged that the Employment Development Department paid unemployment benefits during the period of indemnity and allowed a lien for overlapping payments, to be determined by a workers' compensation judge.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportAMENDED decisiontemporary disability indemnitypermanent disability indemnityEmployment Development Departmentunemployment compensation disability benefitsoverlapping paymentslien claimaward
References
0
Case No. ADJ6877079
Regular
Mar 10, 2011

JUAN JOSE CUEVAS vs. ROOFING EXCELLENCE AND REMOVAL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant, Juan Jose Cuevas, initially sought reconsideration of an Order Denying Change of Venue. However, the applicant subsequently filed a "Withdrawal of Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration." Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition as withdrawn. This dismissal is based solely on the applicant's own action to withdraw their appeal.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawal of PetitionOrder Denying Change of VenueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalRoofing Excellence and RemovalState Compensation Insurance FundADJ6877079ApplicantDefendant
References
0
Case No. ADJ10228159
Regular
Nov 14, 2016

MARIA CUEVAS vs. AG UNLIMITED, INC., ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, YORK RISK SERVICES

This case involves an untimely Petition for Reconsideration filed by applicant Maria Cuevas. The applicant's Findings and Order were served by mail and email on August 18, 2016. The deadline to file a petition for reconsideration was September 12, 2016, including five additional days for mail service. The petition was not filed until September 22, 2016. The Appeals Board found no evidence of defective service and therefore dismissed the petition as untimely.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyDismissalJurisdictionalService of ProcessOfficial Address RecordEAMSDefective ServiceWCJ ReportSupplemental Pleading
References
4
Case No. ADJ2104768 (FRE 0220936)
Regular
Jun 01, 2009

MARTIN PORRAS vs. H&F FARMS, IGNACIO & DELFINA CUEVAS, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE CO., GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

California Indemnity Insurance Company sought reconsideration and removal of a WCJ's denial of its motion to dismiss. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the order denying dismissal is not a final order subject to review under Labor Code § 5900. The petition for removal was denied as California Indemnity failed to demonstrate requisite prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be inadequate. The prior order approving a Compromise and Release was already rescinded and returned for further proceedings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise & Releaserescindedinterim orderfinal orderLabor Code § 5900
References
3
Case No. FRE 0220936
Regular
Apr 20, 2007

MARTIN PORRAS vs. H & F FARMS, IGNACIO & DELFINA CUEVAS, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE CO., GAB ROBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior decision, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This action means the original decision is vacated and the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) will re-examine the matter. The WCAB's order does not constitute a final decision on the merits, and parties retain the right to seek reconsideration of any new decision by the WCJ.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMartin PorrasH & F FarmsIgnacio CuevasDelfina CuevasCalifornia Indemnity Insurance Co.GAB Robins North AmericaInc.State Compensation Insurance FundFRE 0220936
References
0
Case No. ADJ7774631
Regular
Aug 16, 2019

IGNACIO GARCIA vs. TRINIDAD RODRIGUEZ dba RODRIGUEZ FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, SERGIO RODRIGUEZ

This case involves a worker's compensation claim by Ignacio Garcia. The primary issue was whether Garcia was employed by Trinidad Rodriguez dba Rodriguez Farm Labor Contractor or Sergio Rodriguez. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, affirming the judge's finding that Trinidad Rodriguez was the employer. While the Board noted the applicant has the burden to prove employment, they found the evidence supported the conclusion that Garcia was employed by Trinidad Rodriguez.

Petition for ReconsiderationDenialEmployment StatusFarm Labor ContractorState Compensation Insurance FundGoing and Coming RuleBurden of ProofCredibility DeterminationsInsured EmployerUninsured Employer
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 42 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