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. 2016 NY Slip Op 02787 [138 AD3d 797]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 13, 2016

Mileski v. MSC Indus. Direct Co., Inc.

Drena Mileski, as administratrix of Ronald P. Mileski's estate, initiated a wrongful death action following Ronald's death from injuries sustained operating a lathe machine. The plaintiff sought to amend the complaint to include Burns Real Estate, LLC, Nijon Tool Co., Inc., Island Machine Supply Corp., and John Raymond Burns as additional defendants, relying on the relation-back doctrine. The Supreme Court granted this amendment. However, the Appellate Division reversed, ruling that the relation-back doctrine was inapplicable. The court reasoned that if the new defendants were united in interest with the employer, they would share the employer's immunity under the Workers' Compensation Law, rendering the claims time-barred.

Wrongful DeathLathe AccidentRelation-Back DoctrineStatute of LimitationsAmended ComplaintVicarious LiabilityWorkers' Compensation ImmunityAppellate ProcedureTimeliness of AppealUnity of Interest
References
12
Case No. ADJ4313424 (SJO 0269593)
Regular
Jul 13, 2011

SUSAN GRACE vs. SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's order that allowed the applicant to obtain expert evidence on the "Ogilvie" issue after the mandatory settlement conference (MSC). The Board found the applicant failed to demonstrate due diligence in identifying and retaining an expert witness for this issue prior to the MSC. Consequently, discovery was closed as of the MSC date, and the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Ogilvie evidenceGrupe casePetition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceLabor Code section 5502(e)(3)due diligencePermanent Disability Rating ScheduleDREC adjustment factorWCJAppeals Board
References
2
Case No. ADJ7071120
Regular
Jul 07, 2010

CARRIE JOHNSON vs. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

Defendant Federal Express sought removal of an order allowing applicant further discovery beyond the mandatory settlement conference (MSC). The Appeals Board granted removal, finding the applicant lacked due diligence in pursuing discovery before the MSC. Applicant's failure to object to the defendant's Declaration of Readiness to Proceed further waived any objections to proceeding on the existing record. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the MSC order and returned the case to the trial level with discovery closed.

Petition for removalMandatory settlement conferenceOrder off calendarDue diligenceQualified Medical EvaluatorDiscovery closureDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedWaiver of objectionsPermanent disabilityIndustrial injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ8861686
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

RAMON RODRIGUEZ vs. METHODIST HOSPITAL OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinding a trial judge's order to reopen discovery for applicant's internal medicine claims. Applicant sought to develop evidence for digestive and diabetes injuries after the Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC), but discovery legally closed on the MSC date. The Board found no good cause for applicant's failure to conduct this discovery earlier, citing Labor Code section 5502(d)(3)'s prohibition against admitting evidence obtained after the MSC without a showing of due diligence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalDecision After RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery ClosureLabor Code Section 5502Record DevelopmentInternal Injury ClaimsDigestive SystemDiabetes
References
1
Case No. ADJ277813 (SAC 0359011)
Regular
Feb 24, 2011

JACINTO BECERRA vs. JOHN LITZO dba LAKE CHAPALA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, overturning a WCJ's order that reopened discovery for an absent, potentially uninsured employer. The Board found that continuing discovery beyond the Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) violated Labor Code section 5502(e)(3) absent good cause. The hearing scheduled for March 7, 2011, was redesignated as an MSC, and the case was returned to the trial level. If the employer fails to appear at this new MSC, discovery will close, and any subsequent evidence offered will be inadmissible without a showing of due diligence.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceLabor Code section 5502(e)(3)Discovery closingDue process rightsIllegally uninsuredUninsured Employers Benefit Trust FundIndustrial injuryLow backLegs
References
1
Case No. ADJ10044579
Regular
Dec 20, 2017

NEVITA BAILEY vs. FIRST GROUP AMERICA, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant filed a Petition for Removal after the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss due to the applicant's failure to appear at a Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC). The ALJ's notice stipulated dismissal unless the applicant appeared at a rescheduled MSC, which was subsequently taken off calendar due to the removal petition. The Appeals Board denied removal, finding no substantial prejudice as the applicant's failure to appear at the rescheduled MSC was rendered moot by the rescheduling. The Board also noted that a Notice of Intent to Dismiss should not be issued for a *potential* future failure to appear, but rather based on an actual occurrence.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMandatory Settlement ConferenceAdministrative Law JudgeNotice of Intent to DismissWCAB Rule 10563WCAB Rule 10562substantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ680433 (ANA 0392521) ADJ664369 (ANA 0392519) ADJ4680486 (ANA 0392520)
Regular
Apr 04, 2013

DANIEL SIMON vs. CITY OF VERNON

The applicant, a firefighter, claimed multiple industrial injuries. At the Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC), he requested to reopen discovery for further deposition of an Agreed Medical Evaluator, which the defendant opposed. The Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no diligence shown for the delayed deposition. Discovery was officially closed as of the MSC date, affirming the trial date.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery ClosureAgreed Medical EvaluatorDepositionDue DiligenceLabor Code 5502(d)(3)Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFirefighterFire Chief
References
0
Case No. ADJ7622132
Regular
May 10, 2011

MARIA SOLORIO DE VILLA vs. RADISSON PLAZA dba LA QUINTA, COMP WEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal. The Board ordered the Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) off calendar to allow for the deposition of the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME). The applicant had previously objected to the defendant's Declaration of Readiness to Proceed due to outstanding discovery. The Board found that scheduling the MSC over the applicant's objection was improper given the incomplete discovery.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorQME DepositionDiscovery ObjectionsOff CalendarJudicial EconomyFairnessElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
0
Case No. SFO 0496229
Regular
Jul 23, 2007

JOHN LERKE vs. LOCKHEED MARTIN, ESIS

The Appeals Board granted removal to rescind a WCJ's order issued at a Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) due to a lack of record. The WCJ's order addressed issues of medical evaluations and costs without any admitted evidence or stipulations of fact. The case is remanded to the trial level for proper proceedings, including a new MSC and potentially a trial with a properly organized record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardremovalrescissionmandatory settlement conferenceQME panelLabor Code section 139.2SB 899section 4062.1psychiatric injurymedical-legal evaluation
References
2
Case No. ADJ3134104 (MON 0361046)
Regular
May 01, 2012

NARCISO ESTRADA vs. GOLD STAR JEWELRY INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, which sought to change a scheduled mandatory settlement conference (MSC) to a trial. The Board held that removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, neither of which was demonstrated. The applicant's contention that a brief delay for an MSC would cause irreparable harm was rejected. Therefore, the petition was denied as the applicant did not meet the stringent standards for removal.

Petition for RemovalAppeals BoardWCJOrder Rescinding and Vacating OrderMandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)substantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationexpeditiouslyextraordinary remedy
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 49 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