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. ADJ4713838 (MON 0335494)
Regular
Mar 15, 2013

PHYLLIS SWINK vs. AVIS RENT-A-CAR, CNA CLAIMS PLUS

This case concerns a lien claimant, KVP Pharmacy, seeking reconsideration of a prior order dismissing its lien. KVP Pharmacy argued the dismissal order was invalid due to an unsigned and undated document. However, the Appeals Board dismissed KVP Pharmacy's petition because it was filed approximately six months after the lien dismissal order was served. The Board found the petition to be untimely, as California Labor Code requires reconsideration petitions to be filed within 20 days, plus an additional five days if served by mail. Therefore, the Board lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits of KVP Pharmacy's arguments.

WCABLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionOrder Dismissing LienWCJService by MailRecital of ServicePresumption of ReceiptLabor Code
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Innoviant Pharmacy, Inc. v. Morganstern

Innoviant Pharmacy, Inc. sued its former sales executive, Max Morganstern, for unfair competition and breach of a non-compete agreement after he joined a competitor, Summit Pharmacy, Inc., and solicited Innoviant's customer referral sources. Innoviant sought a preliminary injunction to prevent Morganstern from contacting 114 key New York referral sources. The court found Innoviant unlikely to succeed on its breach of contract claim because the employment agreement was deemed unenforceable due to a later signed document. However, the court found Innoviant likely to succeed on its unfair competition claim, as Morganstern misappropriated a list of potential referral sources and business cards. Consequently, the court granted the preliminary injunction, restraining Morganstern from contacting the specified referral sources until February 24, 2006, conditioned on Innoviant posting a $100,000 security bond.

Preliminary InjunctionUnfair CompetitionBreach of ContractNon-compete ClauseTrade SecretsCustomer ListsConfidential InformationEmployment AgreementSales ExecutiveReferral Sources
References
50
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 03820 [195 AD3d 776]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2021

21st Century Pharmacy v. American Intl. Group

21st Century Pharmacy appealed a Supreme Court order that dismissed its declaratory judgment action against American International Group (AIG) and the New York Workers' Compensation Board (WCB). The pharmacy sought a declaration that it could pursue payment for prescription bills in a plenary court proceeding, rather than solely through the WCB, and also sought a monetary judgment. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint, asserting the WCB had exclusive subject matter jurisdiction. The Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed this decision, clarifying that while the WCB holds primary jurisdiction over Workers' Compensation Law applicability, it does not possess exclusive jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action. The case was remitted to the Supreme Court for a determination on the merits of AIG's motion to dismiss.

Declaratory JudgmentSubject Matter JurisdictionWorkers' Compensation LawPrimary JurisdictionExclusive JurisdictionPrescription BillsAppellate ProcedureRemittalPharmacy RightsCourt Jurisdiction
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rivera v. Ndola Pharmacy Corp.

Plaintiff Siew Lian Rivera brought an action alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), New York Labor Law, Human Rights Law, Administrative Code, and common law claims against Ndola Pharmacy Corp. and several individuals. Defendants moved for partial summary judgment on the FLSA and Labor Law claims and to dismiss state law claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court denied partial summary judgment, finding Rivera's testimony sufficient for overtime claims despite credibility questions. Supplemental jurisdiction was retained for the sexual harassment claim against N. Patel due to its connection to wage allegations, but other state law claims were dismissed without prejudice for lacking a common nucleus of operative fact with the federal claim. Additionally, certain motions related to amending the answer regarding the plaintiff's standing due to bankruptcy were granted in part and denied in part.

FLSAOvertime CompensationWage ClaimsSexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentSummary JudgmentSupplemental JurisdictionBankruptcy EstateCredibility of WitnessEmployment Law
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lamarr-Arruz v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.

This case involves claims of a hostile work environment and retaliation brought by Zaire Lamarr-Arruz and Mominna Ansoralli against CVS Pharmacy, Inc. Plaintiffs allege racial profiling of customers and a barrage of racial slurs by supervisors and managers, violating 42 U.S.C. §1981, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL. Lamarr-Arruz also filed a retaliation claim, alleging delayed return from medical leave and termination due to his complaints. CVS sought summary judgment, denying the allegations and arguing the lack of supervisory responsibility for some alleged harassers and the availability of their anti-harassment policy. The court denied CVS's motions for summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding the existence of a hostile work environment for Ansoralli, the imputation of hostile conduct to CVS, and Lamarr-Arruz's retaliation claim, including the pretextual nature of his termination reasons.

Hostile Work EnvironmentRacial DiscriminationRetaliationSummary JudgmentEmployment LawCivil Rights Act of 1991New York Human Rights LawNew York City Human Rights LawEmployer LiabilitySupervisory Liability
References
60
Case No. ADJ9822757, ADJ9826854
Regular
May 05, 2017

MIREYA CASILLAS vs. CVS PHARMACY, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied CVS Pharmacy's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that a single physician's opinion can constitute substantial evidence, even if conflicting. This decision upholds the WCJ's findings regarding industrial injuries, including dyspepsia, fibromyalgia, rheumatological arthritis, and psyche, as reported by various medical experts. The Board specifically noted that apportionment issues were not at the forefront of the current "body parts" determination.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDRECONSIDERATION DENIEDSUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCEWCJ REPORTAPPORTIONMENTPSYCHERHEUMATOID ARTHRITISFIBROMYALGIADYSPEPSIAGASTROINTESTINAL
References
1
Case No. ADJ3 176427 (AHM 0148942)
Regular
Feb 03, 2016

GILBERT LUNA vs. NATIONWIDE PHARMACY, LIBERTY MUTUAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision finding that Nationwide Pharmacy and Liberty Mutual's payment of $52,481.40 for spinal surgery was reasonable. Lien claimant Monrovia Memorial Hospital sought reconsideration, arguing a higher fee was warranted and they were exempt from the Official Medical Fee Schedule. However, the Board found that while the hospital was exempt from the fee schedule, it still had the burden to prove the reasonableness of its charges. The lien claimant failed to meet this evidentiary burden by a preponderance of the evidence.

Monrovia Memorial HospitalLien claimantOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleOMFS exemptionReasonable feeUsual and customary reimbursementBurden of proofFacility feesLong term care hospitalTitle 42 Code of Regulations
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Santiago v. Fred-Doug 117, L.L.C.

The case involves a plaintiff who was injured while working at a Rite Aid pharmacy. There is a dispute whether the plaintiff was engaged in covered 'repair' work under Labor Law § 240 (1) or nonactionable 'routine maintenance,' as the plaintiff claimed he was fixing broken air conditioning while his employer's records indicated maintenance. Additionally, there are conflicting accounts regarding the cause of the plaintiff's fall from a ladder, raising the issue of whether his own actions were the sole proximate cause of his injuries. The court found that these discordant versions of facts preclude a determination as a matter of law, indicating that these are factual issues for a factfinder to resolve.

Labor Law § 240(1)Worker SafetyLadder AccidentRoutine MaintenanceRepair WorkProximate CauseFactual DisputeSummary Judgment PrecludedPersonal InjuryPremises Liability
References
6
Case No. ADJ6734934, ADJ7902780
Regular
Feb 18, 2014

LETICIA RODRIGUEZ vs. CVS PHARMACY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied CVS Pharmacy's Petition for Removal. Removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which the defendant failed to demonstrate. The Board found that a petition for reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if the ultimate decision on permanent disability is adverse. Therefore, the petition was denied, and the Board declined to consider sanctions against the defendant.

Petition for RemovalAppeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Substantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationJudicial EfficiencyPiecemeal LitigationPermanent DisabilityDeposition
References
3
Case No. ADJ240659 (MON 0358311)
Regular
Mar 25, 2009

JOHN PELLETIER vs. CVS PHARMACY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding an industrial injury to the applicant's bilateral wrists sustained while employed at CVS Pharmacy. The Board found the date of injury, for the purpose of Labor Code sections 5412 and 5500.5, was February 11, 2008, when the applicant first knew his disability was work-related and received medical confirmation. This date was subsequent to his termination, thus negating the post-termination defense under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10) due to exceptions that applied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCVS PharmacyAmerican Home AssuranceJohn Pelletiercumulative injurybilateral wristsLabor Code section 5412date of injurycompensable disabilitymedical confirmation
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 122 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