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

Integrated Construction Services, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance

Integrated Construction Services, Inc. (Integrated) purchased a commercial general liability policy from Scottsdale Insurance Company (Scottsdale). Integrated received delayed and initially incorrect notifications about a worker's injury. After clarifying details, Integrated notified Scottsdale, which denied coverage citing late notice. Integrated then filed a declaratory judgment action to compel Scottsdale to defend and indemnify it. Scottsdale's motion to dismiss the complaint was denied by the Supreme Court. On appeal, the order denying dismissal was affirmed, as Integrated adequately pleaded reasonable delay and Scottsdale's documentary evidence was insufficient to refute the claim.

Commercial General LiabilityInsurance PolicyDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyLate NoticeDeclaratory JudgmentMotion to DismissCPLR 3211(a)(1)CPLR 3211(a)(7)Documentary Evidence
References
10
Case No. ADJ3730512 (FRE 0210105)
Regular
Aug 28, 2009

Roy Dettling vs. MERCED COMMUNITY COLLEGE, JT2 INTEGRATED SAN RAMON

In *Dettling v. Merced Community College*, the Appeals Board rescinded a prior award of retroactive vocational rehabilitation maintenance allowance (VRMA). The Board found that the repeal of Labor Code § 139.5 on January 1, 2009, terminated all pending and non-final vocational rehabilitation claims. Because the applicant's VRMA award was not final before the repeal, his right to these benefits was extinguished. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings not involving VRMA.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationVocational RehabilitationLabor Code § 139.5Qualified Injured WorkerVRMAWeiner v. Ralphs CompanyRepealNon-finalVested Rights
References
1
Case No. ADJ3370297 (SFO 0446248)
Regular
Aug 29, 2014

SHANNON MURPHY vs. OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, JT2 INTEGRATED

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by applicant Shannon Murphy against Oakland Unified School District and JT2 Integrated. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition as untimely because it was filed more than 25 days after the original Award issued on September 23, 2005. This delay exceeds the statutory 20-day period for filing reconsideration, plus the additional 5 days for mailing. Therefore, the Board found the petition procedurally barred and dismissed it.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Code of Civil Procedure Section 1013Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissal OrderAward DateAdministrative Law Judge ReportApplicantDefendant Employer
References
0
Case No. ADJ1730584 (OAK 0230681)
Regular
Jun 11, 2013

ELDORA ROBINSON vs. OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTSRICT, JT2 INTEGRATED SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision regarding Eldora Robinson's claim against Oakland Unified School District and JT2 Integrated Services. The WCAB rescinded the judge's decision, finding it was not a final resolution on the merits. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the Workers' Compensation Judge. Parties retain the right to seek reconsideration of the subsequent ruling.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeWCJReconsideration GrantedDecision RescindedFurther ProceedingsTrial LevelFinal DecisionMerits
References
0
Case No. ADJ6953675
Regular
Aug 06, 2015

HOA DOAN vs. SAN RAMON VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL INSURANCE GROUP

In *Doan v. San Ramon Valley Unified School District*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed, exceeding the jurisdictional 25-day deadline. The WCAB emphasized that a petition must be *received* by the WCAB within the statutory period, not just mailed. Therefore, the Board lacked the authority to consider the merits of the late petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ DecisionProof of MailingCase DismissalLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsWCAB Rule
References
4
Case No. ADJ3362574
Regular
Oct 18, 2012

LAURA BIGGS vs. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Laura Biggs' Petition for Reconsideration in this case against San Bernardino County Medical Center and San Bernardino County. The dismissal was based on the WCAB's review of the record and adoption of the administrative law judge's report and recommendation. The report provided the reasoning for the dismissal, which the WCAB incorporated by reference. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was officially dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDismissalReport and RecommendationAdministrative Law JudgeSan Bernardino County Medical CenterLaura BiggsWorkers' Compensation CaseLegal DocumentCase Number
References
0
Case No. ANA 0347858
Regular
Sep 12, 2008

KEYIN L. ROSS vs. SAN DIEGO CHARGERS and LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION (CIGA), SAN DIEGO CHARGERS, KANSAS CITY CHIEFS, TIG

The WCA's decision is affirmed for two reasons: Kansas City is wrong in claiming that San Diego was self-insured, and CIGA's statutes preclude Kansas City from recovering from San Diego.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCIGALegion Insurance CompanyKansas City ChiefsSan Diego Chargerscontributioninsolvent insurercovered claimsInsurance Code section 1063.1(c)(5)deductible reimbursement
References
5
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 00281
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 16, 2025

Santana v. San Mateo Constr. Corp.

William Santana appealed an order dismissing his complaint against San Mateo Construction Corp. and Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. The Appellate Division modified the order, denying dismissal of the first cause of action entirely and partially denying dismissal of the second cause of action. The court held that Administrative Code § 19-142, which mandates prevailing wages for work involving street use or opening, applies broadly and not solely to public works projects. It affirmed that workers, as third-party beneficiaries, can enforce agreements made under this provision, and contractual disclaimers of these rights are void against public policy.

Prevailing wagesAdministrative Code § 19-142Third-party beneficiary rightsContractual disclaimersPublic policyMotions to dismissAppellate reviewLabor lawConstruction contractsStreet permits
References
8
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 06969 [211 AD3d 1194]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 08, 2022

Integrity Intl., Inc. v. HP, Inc.

Plaintiff, Integrity International, Inc., doing business as Tarrenpoint, sued defendants, HP, Inc., for breach of service agreements dating from 1994 to 2016, primarily concerning defendants' alleged failure to make timely payments and pay late fees. The Supreme Court partially granted defendants' motion for partial summary judgment, dismissing claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing as time-barred, and also dismissing claims for late fees, finding them not contemplated by the agreements. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's dismissal regarding late fees and the timeliness of breach of contract claims. However, the Appellate Division found triable issues of fact concerning whether defendants breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by diverting clients and workers. The court also held that limitation of liability clauses in the agreements were enforceable, precluding consequential damages but allowing for the recovery of general damages.

Contract DisputeTimely PaymentLate FeesSummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsImplied CovenantGood Faith and Fair DealingLimitation of LiabilityConsequential DamagesGeneral Damages
References
28
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 03489
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2023

Ramones v. 425 County Rd., LLC

Plaintiff Sandro Ramones appealed an order denying his summary judgment motion and granting summary judgment to defendants 425 County Road, LLC, and Farrell Building Company, Inc., regarding Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) violations. The plaintiff was injured while loading equipment onto a van after performing roofing and shingling work. The Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the order, denying the defendants' motion to dismiss the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and affirming the denial of the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on that claim. The court found that the plaintiff's activity was ancillary to the alteration of the structure and protected under Labor Law § 240 (1), and defendants failed to show no safety device would have prevented the fall. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim, finding that 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (f) did not apply as the van's roof was not a "working level above ground."

Personal InjuryLabor LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewConstruction Site SafetyElevation RisksScaffolding AccidentsWorker FallStatutory InterpretationAncillary Work
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 1,199 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