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

Prevost v. New York State Department of Social Services

The petitioners, maternal grandparents, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a determination by the State Commissioner of Social Services and the Warren County Department of Social Services. They sought to expunge a report from the State Central Register indicating inadequate guardianship concerning their grandson, Justin. Justin had been placed in foster care, and concerns arose about his behavior after monthly visits with the petitioners, prompting a psychiatrist to recommend discontinuing overnight visits. The psychiatric report detailed Justin's anger towards his grandmother and later allegations of diapering. Despite the petitioners' denials and claims of bias, the agency's decision to indicate inadequate guardianship was upheld after administrative review and a fair hearing. The court ultimately confirmed the determination, citing substantial evidence based on Justin's consistent accounts.

Child protective servicesInadequate guardianshipFoster careAdoption eligibilityCPLR article 78 proceedingAdministrative reviewExpungement of reportHearsay evidenceCredibility determinationSocial Services Law
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Velu v. Velocity Express, Inc.

Trevor Velu, a delivery driver, sued Velocity Express, Inc. (VEI) alleging unpaid wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law, contending he was an employee. He also brought claims for breach of contract and quantum meruit related to a fuel surcharge. The Court determined that Velu was an independent contractor, not an employee, under both federal and state labor laws, leading to the dismissal of his wage and overtime claims. Summary judgment was denied for both parties on the breach of contract claim due to an unclear definition of 'net revenue' concerning the fuel surcharge. The quantum meruit claim was dismissed because a valid agreement existed between the parties.

FLSAIndependent ContractorEmployee StatusNew York Labor LawSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractQuantum MeruitDelivery DriverWage DisputeOvertime
References
24
Case No. 06 Civ. 12878(RLC)
Regular Panel Decision

International Securities Exchange, LLC v. S & P Dow Jones Indices, LLC

International Securities Exchange, LLC and International Exchange Holdings, Inc. (ISE) sued S & P Dow Jones, LLC (Dow Jones) for a declaration of right to list options on S&P 500 and DJIA indices without a license, claiming federal copyright preemption. The lawsuit was stayed pending resolution of an identical case in Illinois state courts. The Illinois courts ruled in favor of Dow Jones, affirming its intellectual property rights and concluding that ISE's actions constituted misappropriation, a decision affirmed by the Illinois Appellate Court and upheld by the US Supreme Court's denial of certiorari. Upon returning to the current court, ISE sought to amend its complaint, while Dow Jones moved to dismiss based on res judicata. The court granted Dow Jones' motion, ruling that the Illinois judgment was binding under the Full Faith and Credit Act and Illinois preclusion rules, thus barring ISE from relitigating the preemption issue. ISE's motion to amend its complaint was denied as futile.

Copyright PreemptionRes JudicataCollateral EstoppelFull Faith and Credit ActIntellectual Property RightsStock Market IndicesOptions TradingUnfair CompetitionTortious InterferenceIllinois State Law
References
42
Case No. OAK 313422
Regular
Mar 11, 2008

JOHN SILVA vs. BMD PLUMBING, INC., STATE FARM

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify the applicability of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule. The Board affirmed its prior decision rescinding the original award and remanding for new findings using the 2005 schedule, concluding that no report pre-dating 2005 indicated the existence of permanent disability. This ruling aligns with recent appellate court decisions holding that specific P&S statements are not required if a report indicates permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityPDRSVera v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Genlyte Group v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Zenith Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Labor Code Section 4660(d)Medical-Legal Report
References
6
Case No. ADJ351818 (FRE 0240633) ADJ850154 (FRE 0245677)
Regular
May 10, 2011

FELIX LOPEZ HEREDIA vs. NUNEZ BROTHERS RANCH, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Zenith Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration, reversing the original award. The Board found that a prior treating physician's report did not adequately indicate permanent disability, thus the 2005 rating schedule, not the 1997 schedule, should apply to the applicant's 2003 injury. The case was returned to the trial level for rating under the 2005 schedule and to determine attorney's fees. A dissenting opinion argued that the prior physician's report did indicate permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityApportionmentRating ScheduleLabor Code section 4660(d)Treating PhysicianMedical-Legal ReportVocational RehabilitationIndustrial Injury
References
3
Case No. MON 0318706
Regular
Jul 11, 2008

EDGAR BENITEZ vs. IRISH COMMUNICATIONS, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, INC.

This case concerns the appropriate permanent disability rating schedule. The applicant argues the 1997 schedule applies due to his physician indicating permanent disability before January 1, 2005, an exception to the 2005 schedule's use. The Board granted reconsideration, agreeing that the physician's report finding the applicant eligible for vocational rehabilitation constituted an indication of permanent disability, thus triggering the 1997 schedule. The matter is returned to the trial level for rating under the 1997 schedule and subsequent issuance of a decision.

Permanent Disability Rating ScheduleLabor Code Section 4660(d)Primary Treating PhysicianVocational RehabilitationComprehensive Medical-Legal ReportPermanent and Stationary StatusGenlyte Group v. ZavalaZenith v. CuginiVera v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Agreed Medical Evaluator
References
3
Case No. RDG 120102
Regular
Jul 30, 2007

Dominic Watkins vs. Outback Steakhouse, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns the application of the correct permanent disability rating schedule for an industrial injury occurring between 2003 and 2004. The applicant argued that the pre-2005 schedule should apply due to treating physician reports from November 2004 indicating permanent disability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed the initial decision, agreeing that the doctor's reports, which noted a "chronic problem" and imposed significant work restrictions, sufficiently "indicated the existence of permanent disability" to trigger the older 1997 Schedule.

Rating Schedule2005 Schedule1997 SchedulePermanent DisabilityTreating PhysicianMedical-Legal ReportLabor Code Section 4660(d)Prospective ApplicationCumulative InjuryIndustrial Injury
References
1
Case No. VNO 0504722
Regular
Feb 13, 2008

FRANCK PETER vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; TPA: CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES

This case concerns a police officer injured in the line of duty, who sought further temporary disability benefits beyond the 104 weeks already paid. The applicant argued that "Injured on Duty" pay should not count towards the statutory limit, and that an exception for high-velocity eye injuries should apply. The Board denied reconsideration, holding that "Injured on Duty" pay is included within the 104-week limit under Labor Code section 4656, citing precedent, and found no evidence of a high-velocity eye injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryPolice OfficerTemporary Disability IndemnityInjured on Duty (IOD)Los Angeles Administrative Code Section 4.177Labor Code Section 4656Radesky v. City of Los AngelesHigh-Velocity Eye Injury ExceptionMedical Evidence
References
3
Case No. ADJ1973556 (LBO 0374472)
Regular
May 23, 2011

RONALD SOMERS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding $28\%$ permanent disability for an admitted industrial knee injury. The applicant argued for application of the older 1997 disability rating schedule, claiming a pre-2005 medical report indicated permanent disability. However, the Board found no substantial medical evidence in the record prior to January 1, 2005, indicating permanent disability to trigger the older schedule. Consequently, the WCJ's award using the 2005 Schedule was affirmed.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent Disability2005 Schedule1997 ScheduleTreating Physician ReportMedical-Legal ReportLabor Code Section 4660(d)Industrial Injury
References
4
Case No. ADJ473373 (ANA 0406381)
Regular
Feb 10, 2012

FERNANDO GUTIERREZ vs. SOCAL FRAMING aka BMHC; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE, administered by ESIS, INC.

This case concerns applicant's claim for extended temporary disability (TD) benefits beyond 104 weeks due to a left eye injury. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of the "amputation" exception, ruling that the surgical removal of an eye does not fit the statutory definition. However, the Board remanded the case for further development of the record on the "high-velocity eye injury" exception, as the velocity and force of the object that struck the applicant's eye were unclear. The applicant's Petition for Removal was dismissed as reconsideration was the appropriate remedy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFernando GutierrezSoCal FramingBMHCACE American InsuranceESISInc.ADJ473373ANA 0406381Opinion and Decision
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 896 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