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. ADJ1457637
Regular
May 20, 2014

NEOMI SEQUEIROS vs. COMPTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has dismissed a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Compton Unified School District and Gallagher Bassett in the case of Neomi Sequeiros. This dismissal is due to the petitioner's withdrawal of the petition. The original decision being reconsidered was issued on March 5, 2014. The Board formally issued this dismissal order on May 20, 2014.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawnDismissedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCompton Unified School DistrictGallagher BassettNeomi SequeirosADJ1457637LBO 0366014March 5 2014
References
0
Case No. ADJ1883092 (AHM 0147002)
Regular
Jul 07, 2014

JAMES HUCKABEE vs. RALPHS/THE KROGER COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by James Huckabee. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely. Huckabee had actual notice of the September 4, 2013 Order Dismissing Lien Claim by March 4, 2014, but did not file the petition until May 5, 2014. This exceeded the 20-day jurisdictional deadline for filing a petition for reconsideration after receiving actual notice.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code section 5903Jurisdictional Time LimitActual NoticeOrder of DismissalLien ClaimDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedPetition for Relief from DefaultCode of Civil Procedure section 473(b)
References
8
Case No. ADJ2440985 (EUR 037746)
Regular
Jun 11, 2014

FRANK McCOVEY vs. WAYNE BARE TRUCKING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In McCovey v. Wayne Bare Trucking, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on April 17, 2014, over 25 days after the Board's decision was served on March 3, 2014. California law allows 20 days for reconsideration, plus an additional 5 days for mailing, and filing is determined by receipt date, not mailing date. As the petition was received beyond the jurisdictional deadline, the Board lacked the power to grant it.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyDismissalLabor Code Section 5903WCAB Rule 10507JurisdictionalAppeals BoardWayne Bare TruckingState Compensation Insurance FundMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
3
Case No. ADJ7644729
Regular
May 20, 2014

COREY EVANS vs. FIRMANICH, TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Corey Evans' petition for reconsideration as untimely. Although the Findings and Orders were issued on December 20, 2013, Evans stated he had actual notice on February 14, 2014. This established a deadline of March 6, 2014, for filing the petition. Since Evans filed his petition on March 26, 2014, it was beyond the jurisdictional deadline. Therefore, the WCAB lacked the power to grant the petition, and it was dismissed accordingly.

Petition for Reconsiderationuntimely filingLabor Code section 5903jurisdictional time limitactual noticeWCJ Report and Recommendationcredibility findingdismissalAppeals Boardapplicant's attorney
References
8
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 00744 [191 AD3d 1363]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 05, 2021

Lemiszko v. Mosovich 2014 Family Trust

Plaintiff Troy C. Lemiszko commenced an action seeking damages for injuries sustained after falling from a ladder on premises owned by Mosovich 2014 Family Trust. Defendant AAA Contracting, LLC appealed an order denying its pre-answer motion to dismiss Labor Law claims and the Trust's cross-claim for contractual indemnification. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's order, rejecting AAA Contracting, LLC's collateral estoppel argument, finding that a prior workers' compensation determination did not preclude plaintiff's Labor Law recovery. The court also upheld the denial of dismissal for the contractual indemnification cross-claim due to insufficient documentary evidence.

Collateral EstoppelLabor Law ClaimsContractual IndemnificationWorkers' Compensation BoardLadder FallPersonal InjuryAppellate ReviewMotion to DismissGeneral Contractor LiabilityUninsured Employer
References
13
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 00411 [234 AD3d 623]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2025

Rodriguez v. Riverside Ctr. Site 5 Owner LLC

Richard Rodriguez, a delivery truck driver, sustained injuries after falling into a hole at a construction site. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to defendants Riverside Center Site 5 Owner LLC, Tishman Construction Corporation, and Five Star Electric Corp., dismissing Rodriguez's Labor Law claims. Upon appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, modified the lower court's decision. The court reinstated Rodriguez's Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, granting him partial summary judgment on liability, reasoning that his tile delivery work was "necessary and incidental" to a protected activity under the statute. However, the dismissal of the Labor Law § 200 claim against Five Star Electric Corp. was affirmed, as Five Star, an electrical contractor, was deemed not a proper Labor Law defendant with supervisory control over the injury site.

Labor LawConstruction AccidentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationPersonal InjuryDuty of CareWorker SafetyProtected ActivityThird-Party Action
References
9
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 05217 [151 AD3d 1050]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2017

March Associates Construction, Inc. v. CMC Masonry Construction

This case involves an appeal in a declaratory judgment action concerning indemnification obligations stemming from an underlying wrongful death lawsuit. March Associates Construction, Inc., and other plaintiffs (respondents), sought a declaration that Blue Ridge Construction, Inc., and its insurers (defendants/appellants), were obligated to indemnify them in a wrongful death action and reimburse $300,000 paid in settlement. The wrongful death action arose from a construction accident where an alleged employee of Blue Ridge fell and died. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs and denied the defendants' cross-motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the order by reversing the grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs, finding they failed to eliminate triable issues of fact regarding the decedent's employment status. The Court affirmed the denial of the defendants' cross-motion, concluding that a settlement stipulation in the underlying action did not bar the indemnification claims and that the defendants also failed to resolve factual issues concerning the decedent's employment and Blue Ridge's negligence.

Declaratory JudgmentIndemnificationCommon-law IndemnificationSummary JudgmentWrongful DeathConstruction AccidentLabor Law ViolationsInsurance Coverage DisputeEmployee StatusRes Judicata Defense
References
19
Case No. ADJ9438851(MF); ADJ9482538
Regular
Jun 02, 2015

Flordeliza Lubiano vs. Kaiser Permanente, Sedgwick Kaiser, Lexington

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of the finding that the applicant sustained both a specific injury on March 20, 2014, and a cumulative trauma injury from February 25, 2008, to March 30, 2014. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found the applicant's testimony credible and Dr. Haronian's medical report to be substantial evidence. The defendant's request for transcripts and a supplemental petition was also denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportSubstantial EvidenceApplicant CredibilitySpecific InjuryCumulative TraumaDietary AideKaiser PermanenteDr. HaronianMedical History
References
2
Case No. ADJ2925672 (MON 0319752) ADJ176214 (MON 0319757)
Regular
Apr 24, 2009

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN vs. WARNER BROTHERS STUDIO FACILITIES, WARNER BROTHERS WORKERS' COMP.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied George Zimmerman's petition for reconsideration regarding a March 26, 2004 injury, agreeing that it did not arise out of his employment. However, the Board granted reconsideration to correct a mathematical error in the permanent disability award for a cumulative trauma back injury, adjusting the award from 31.5% to 30.5% after a 50% apportionment to non-industrial factors. The Board affirmed the WCJ's determination regarding the apportionment for the cumulative trauma injury, while clarifying that the specific March 26, 2004 injury was not industrial. The Amended Findings and Award were modified to reflect the corrected permanent disability rating and attorney fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryBack InjuryLeft Knee InjuryApportionmentPermanent Disability RatingAgreed Medical ExaminerTemporary Disability
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 08, 2014

Claim of Angela Page v. Liberty Central School District

The claimant, a school librarian, sought workers' compensation benefits in July 2004 for a disability from toxic mold exposure, leading to an established claim for hypersensitivity and awards for temporary total disability. In 2006, the claim was amended to include multiple chemical sensitivity, and awards for marked disability continued. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) later classified the claimant with a permanent total disability in March 2010, but the Workers' Compensation Board rescinded this finding and referred the matter to an impartial medical specialist, Theodore Them. Them testified that multiple chemical sensitivity is not a medically recognized condition and that the claimant had no causally-related disability, which the Board credited in its December 2012 decision, finding no further causally-related disability and closing the case. The claimant's subsequent appeal of this decision was not perfected, and an application for reconsideration was denied. An April 2013 WCLJ decision to further develop the record on disability was challenged by the employer, who argued the December 2012 Board decision had resolved the issue. The Board panel agreed with the employer in January 2014, precluding further development of the record, a decision which this Court affirmed on appeal, stating the issue of causally-related disability had been decided and the claimant's remedy was a timely appeal of the prior Board decision.

References
2
Showing 1-10 of 2,473 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