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. ADJ12226694, ADJ12414651, ADJ12414992, ADJ12414993
Regular
Aug 07, 2024

GUILLERMO GONZALEZ, et al. vs. THE BICYCLE CASINO; ARCH INDEMNITY INS. CO., administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT, et al.

The Appeals Board imposed sanctions against attorneys Susan Garrett and Lance Garrett for filing petitions for reconsideration with the willful intent to delay trial proceedings, finding their actions were indisputably without merit and designed to halt court proceedings.

Labor Code Section 5813SanctionsAttorney FeesCostsPetition for ReconsiderationWillful IntentDisrupt ProceedingsImproper MotiveIndisputably Without MeritUnnecessary Delay
References
4
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 05642 [187 AD3d 1651]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 09, 2020

Matter of Roesch v. State of New York

Petitioner Joseph Roesch, a resident at Central New York Psychiatric Center, commenced a CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking assignment of counsel and poor person status. The Supreme Court, Oneida County, denied his application and dismissed the petition sua sponte. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirmed the judgment, concluding that the petition was wholly without merit as it sought only counsel without a proper cause of action or linkage to the respondent. The court also found no abuse of discretion in denying poor person status, as the CPLR article 78 petition lacked arguable merit.

CPLR Article 78Poor Person StatusAssignment of CounselSua Sponte DismissalAppellate ReviewPsychiatric Center ResidentAbuse of DiscretionArguable MeritFinal JudgmentAppellate Division Fourth Department
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 22, 1980

Hilowitz v. Hilowitz

In a negligence action for personal injuries, the plaintiff appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 22, 1980. The order, issued by Justice Hyman, had denied the plaintiff's motion to dismiss the defense of collateral estoppel. The appellate court affirmed the order, holding that an arbitration award, even without judicial confirmation, can serve as a basis for res judicata and collateral estoppel if there was a final determination on the merits. The court referenced Kilduff v Donna Oil Corp. and distinguished Hana Heating & Air Conditioning Co. v Sheet Metal Workers Int. Assn. All other contentions raised by the plaintiff were deemed to be without merit.

NegligencePersonal InjuryAppealCollateral EstoppelRes JudicataArbitration AwardJudicial ConfirmationFinal DeterminationAppellate DecisionSupreme Court Order
References
4
Case No. ADJ2989434 (LAO 0886329)
Regular
Feb 08, 2012

MYRA CAMPOS vs. KEIRO NURSING HOME, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case involved a lien claimant, RH Interpreting Services, seeking reconsideration of the denial of its lien and imposition of sanctions. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding RH Interpreting was not denied due process as it had notice and failed to appear at hearings. The Board also upheld the sanctions, agreeing that RH Interpreting failed to meet its burden of proof to establish its lien, making its claim indisputably without merit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantReconsiderationFindings and OrdersOrders for SanctionsCompromise and ReleaseDue ProcessLien conferenceNotice of Intention to DismissTrial
References
3
Case No. ADJ704934 (AHM 0086088)
Regular
Mar 15, 2010

DEBORAH RICHARDSON vs. HELPMATES STAFFING, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION By CAMBRIDGE For LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, In Liquidation, NUTRILITE, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) imposed a $500 sanction on lien claimant Dr. Thomas Curtis. Dr. Curtis filed an untimely and frivolous Petition for Reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) that did not address his lien. The WCAB found that Dr. Curtis was neither aggrieved by the OACR nor was it a final order as to him, making his petition indisputably without merit and a bad-faith tactic. His attempt to justify the filing as premature rather than untimely lacked a reasonable basis and did not excuse the sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Board Rule 10561Bad Faith ConductFrivolous PetitionUntimely FilingPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and Release
References
5
Case No. ADJ7586945
Regular
Sep 20, 2013

MICHAEL GERTH vs. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award, finding that the defendant's petition contained material misrepresentations and presented arguments "indisputably without merit." Specifically, the defendant misrepresented evidence regarding the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion on injury AOE/COE and incorrectly claimed the applicant's employment was terminated for cause. The Board also issued a notice of intention to impose sanctions up to $1,200 against the defendant and their attorneys for frivolous tactics and misstatements of law, particularly regarding the non-apportionment of medical treatment costs.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAgreed Medical ExaminerAOE/COETemporary Total DisabilityKnee Replacement SurgeryLabor Code Section 5813Appeals Board Rule 10561Bad Faith Actions
References
7
Case No. ADJ7944481
Regular
Aug 22, 2013

IGNACIO PAZ vs. BENIHANA, INC., ZURICH LOS ANGELES

In this workers' compensation case, multiple lien claimants' liens were dismissed for failure to pay the required activation fee or appear at a lien conference. Their attorney claimed they lacked notice of the conference, but evidence indicates their representative initiated the conference and was served with notice. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to consider sanctions against the attorney for filing a petition for reconsideration that appears indisputably without merit, potentially based on misrepresentation or failure to investigate facts. The Board intends to impose sanctions on the attorney for alleged bad faith actions under Labor Code Section 5813.

Lien activation feeLabor Code section 5813WCAB Rule 10561Declaration of ReadinessNotice of Hearinglien conferencepetition for reconsiderationbad faith actionfrivolous petitiondue process violation
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thielmann v. MF Global Holdings Ltd. (In re MF Global Holdings Ltd.)

This case involves motions to dismiss an amended class action complaint filed by former employees (Plaintiffs) against James W. Giddens, as SIPA Trustee for MF Global Inc., and Louis J. Freeh, as Chapter 11 Trustee for MF Global Holdings Ltd., MF Global Finance USA, Inc., and MF Global Holdings USA, Inc. The Plaintiffs allege violations of the federal WARN Act and the New York WARN Act due to employment termination without sufficient notice. The Court granted the SIPA Trustee's motion to dismiss with prejudice, finding the "liquidating fiduciary" principle applicable to MFGI as its statutory purpose was liquidation. However, the Chapter 11 Trustee's motion to dismiss was granted without prejudice and with leave to amend, as the factual record did not conclusively establish that the Chapter 11 Debtors were solely liquidating at the time of layoffs, and the complaint was otherwise deficient. Claims for vacation pay and unpaid wages were dismissed without prejudice to be handled in the claims allowance process.

WARN ActNew York WARN ActClass ActionMass LayoffsPlant ClosingsBankruptcy ProceedingsCorporate LiquidationChapter 11 ReorganizationSIPA TrusteeLiquidating Fiduciary Principle
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Mejia v. Camabo Industries, Inc.

This case details an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision. The claimant, injured as a bridge painter, requested a change of venue for his workers' compensation hearings to White Plains, Westchester County, for convenience. This request was denied by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge based on a general policy that hearings should be scheduled in the claimant's district of residence, as the claimant lived in Bronx County and worked in Nassau County. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the denial and further assessed $500 in costs against the claimant's counsel for continuing the matter without reasonable grounds. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the challenge to the Board's policy was not preserved for review and was, in any event, without merit. The court also upheld the denial of the venue request and the imposition of costs on counsel, finding substantial evidence that the request was made without a reasonable basis under Workers’ Compensation Law § 114-a (3) (ii).

Venue ChangeWorkers' CompensationAppellate ReviewCosts AssessmentCounsel PenaltyBoard DecisionJudicial ReviewPolicy ChallengePreservation of ErrorSubstantial Evidence
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Bonilla

Claimant, a postal worker, was arrested for threatening suicide and subsequently required to undergo a psychiatric evaluation by releasing his medical records to determine his fitness for duty. He refused to release these records, which prevented the completion of the psychiatric examination and ultimately led to him not being permitted to return to work. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board then disqualified him from receiving unemployment insurance benefits, ruling that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. This decision was based on the premise that a claimant who fails to take a reasonably required step as a prerequisite to continued employment is deemed to have voluntarily left their job without good cause. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, finding it supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Voluntary separationUnemployment benefitsGood cause for leaving employmentMedical records releaseFitness for dutyPsychiatric evaluationPostal workerDisqualification from benefitsSubstantial evidence
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 4,577 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