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. ADJ8613780
Regular
Jan 12, 2017

GLENN PARKER vs. KANSAS CITY CHIEFS, TIG/FAIRMONT PREMIER INSURANCE COMPANY, NEW YORK GIANTS, GULF/TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, BUFFALO BILLS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns whether California has sufficient jurisdiction to hear a workers' compensation claim for cumulative injury filed by a former professional football player. The applicant played 12 out of 176 total games in California, which the majority found to be a de minimis contact insufficient for California to assert jurisdiction due to due process concerns, citing the *Johnson* case. The Board affirmed the trial judge's decision to deny jurisdiction, while also correcting a clerical error regarding the insurer. A dissenting commissioner argued that California's interest in protecting workers injured within the state is substantial and that the applicant's contacts were not de minimis.

WCABcumulative industrial injuryprofessional athletede minimis California contactsdue processsubject matter jurisdictionFederal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)constitutional due processextraterritorial provisionsstatutory exemption
References
14
Case No. ADJ6635167
Regular
Aug 01, 2011

CDWARD CARTER vs. MONTEREY MARRIOTT

This case involves a clerical error correction by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB's prior Order, issued June 17, 2011, incorrectly titled and referenced a "disqualification" instead of "removal." The Board is correcting the title to "Order Denying Removal" and substituting "removal" for "disqualification" throughout the order. This correction was made to ensure clarity and understanding of the Board's decision, and the WCAB retains jurisdiction to correct such clerical errors.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Correcting Clerical ErrorOrder Denying RemovalPetition for RemovalDisqualificationMonterey MarriottADJ6635167Toccalino v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Clerical ErrorsRemoval
References
1
Case No. SAC 289384
Regular
Apr 04, 2008

NICK MILIVOJEVICH vs. UNITED AIRLINES

This case involves a clerical error in a prior award of attorney's fees for applicant Nick Milivojevich against United Airlines. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board corrected the award to reflect the correct appellate attorney's fees of $\$ 6,050.00$ and disallowed costs, maintaining its continuing jurisdiction to rectify such errors. The corrected award is payable to Farrell, Fraulob & Brown, A Professional Corporation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClerical ErrorOpinion and AwardAttorney's FeesAppellate Attorney's FeesCostsContinuing JurisdictionToccalinoMorganUnited Airlines
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mainolfi v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

James A. Mainolfi appealed the dismissal of his suit against Liberty Mutual Insurance Company for lack of jurisdiction. The core issue was whether Mainolfi timely filed suit to appeal a negative award from the Texas Industrial Accident Board, as mandated by Section 5 of Article 8307 of the Texas Revised Civil Statutes, which requires filing within 20 days of giving notice of nonabidance. Mainolfi filed suit 22 days after the Board received his notice, attributing the delay to the Board's failure to confirm receipt. The court rejected the argument for a 'good cause' exception, distinguishing the case from precedents involving clerical errors or misnomers, and emphasized Mainolfi's lack of diligence in ensuring timely filing. While acknowledging that the Board's award language was misleading regarding the filing deadline, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment due to Mainolfi's failure to strictly comply with the jurisdictional statute.

JurisdictionTimeliness of FilingIndustrial Accident BoardWorkers' Compensation ActStatutory InterpretationGood Cause ExceptionAppellate ReviewStatute of LimitationsTexas LawNotice Requirements
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Palagurchi v. Mengs Service, Inc.

The claimant, a New York resident, sustained a foot injury while working in New Jersey and sought workers' compensation benefits in New York. Both a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board concluded that New York lacked sufficient contacts to establish jurisdiction over the claim. The appellate court affirmed this decision, noting that the claimant was hired in New Jersey at the employer's offices and performed the majority of job duties outside of New York, thus finding no error in the Board's determination that New York lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

Workers' CompensationJurisdictionOut-of-State InjuryEmployment ContactsNew York LawNew JerseyResidencyHiring LocationBoard DecisionAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

JM Banks v. United States

Norris JM Banks, a federal employee, sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) to recover legal and medical expenses. These expenses were incurred after his Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) disability benefits were initially terminated due to an OWCP procedural error involving a conflicted medical examiner. Although OWCP later reinstated his benefits, Banks sought damages for the period of suspension. The District Court granted the Government's motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court ruled that Banks' claims derived directly from his FECA benefits determination, making FECA the exclusive remedy and precluding judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 8128(b). The court found no exception for constitutional claims or clear statutory violations that would allow it to exercise jurisdiction. The case was dismissed without prejudice.

FECAFTCASubject-Matter JurisdictionMotion to DismissExclusive RemedyJudicial Review BarDue ProcessAdministrative Procedure ActFederal EmployeesWorkers' Compensation
References
53
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Light v. State

Appellant William Travis Light, initially certified to stand trial as an adult for aggravated sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child, appealed his conviction. He contended that the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction for certification because he was not personally served with a summons and petition, as mandated by the Texas Family Code. The appellate court reviewed relevant statutes and case law, affirming that personal service on a juvenile in transfer proceedings is a jurisdictional prerequisite and cannot be waived. The court rejected the State's arguments regarding error preservation, proper service, and harmless error, concluding that the juvenile court never acquired jurisdiction, thus invalidating the district court's subsequent jurisdiction. The judgment was vacated and the cause remanded to the juvenile court.

Juvenile CertificationJurisdictional DefectPersonal ServiceTexas Family CodeCriminal ResponsibilityWaiver of JurisdictionAggravated Sexual AssaultIndecency with a ChildAppellate ProcedureVoid Judgment
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bass v. Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission

The Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission challenged the court's jurisdiction over an appeal filed by James Bass, Executive Director of the Texas Department of Transportation. The appeal concerned interlocutory orders from a district court, which included granting partial summary judgment to the Planning Commission and deferring a ruling on a plea to the jurisdiction by the Executive Director. The Executive Director argued for jurisdiction under Section 51.014(a)(8) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, asserting an implicit denial of his jurisdictional challenges. However, the appellate court concluded it lacked jurisdiction because the district court's explicit deferral of the jurisdictional ruling contradicted any implied denial, or alternatively, effectively vacated any such implied ruling. Consequently, the Planning Commission's motion was granted, and the appeal was dismissed.

interlocutory appealsubject-matter jurisdictiongovernmental immunityplea to the jurisdictionpartial summary judgmentTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeLocal Government Codemandamus reliefinjunctive reliefultra vires claims
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Verdi v. United States

This case addresses the application of pendent jurisdiction in a Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA) case where a state common law claim is asserted against a party over whom there is no independent federal jurisdiction. Plaintiffs brought an action, including a claim against the Town of Huntington, following a slip and fall accident near a U.S. Post Office. The Town of Huntington moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The U.S. Magistrate recommended retaining jurisdiction, applying the doctrine of pendent-party jurisdiction. The District Court adopted this recommendation, concluding that pendent-party jurisdiction is appropriate in FTCA cases under these circumstances to ensure all claims can be tried in a single federal forum. Therefore, the Town of Huntington's motion to dismiss was denied, and its request for an interlocutory appeal was also denied.

Pendent JurisdictionFederal Tort Claims ActSlip and FallMotion to DismissPersonal InjuryFederal Court JurisdictionState Law ClaimsCommon Nucleus of Operative FactInterlocutory AppealJudicial Economy
References
27
Case No. ADJ7622191 ADJ10153210 ADJ3319380 (SAC 0227891)(MF), ADJ4269417 (SAC 0286258)
Regular
Aug 05, 2019

CATHERINA DE LAY vs. CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL, DIGNITY HEALTH, TRAVELERS

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision from July 19, 2019. The error resulted in the misidentification of adjudication numbers in the original decision. The Board is correcting this clerical error without granting reconsideration, as such errors can be amended at any time. The amended caption now accurately includes all relevant case numbers: ADJ7622191, ADJ10153210, ADJ3319380 (SAC 0227891)(MF), and ADJ4269417 (SAC 0286258).

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardclerical errorOpinion and DecisionReconsiderationadjudication numbersSuperior Nationalliquidationpermissibly self-insuredCIGADignity Health
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 6,772 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