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

Stone v. Williams

Robert Stone was injured at a Merit service station in Staten Island on April 3, 1977, when he was struck by a car driven by Kerry Williams. A jury assessed Stone's damages at $200,000 and apportioned 20% liability to the Merit service station defendants. The dissenting opinion argues against the majority's view that the service station owed no duty to direct traffic and that its negligence was not a causative factor. Justice Gibbons contends that the service station had a duty of reasonable care to its patrons and that the jury's finding of negligence and proximate cause, based on inadequate staffing and failure to control traffic, was supported by the evidence. He also argues that the $200,000 damage award was not excessive, citing the severity of Stone's injuries, including a broken leg, a mangled hand with a shattered middle finger, and the amputation of a ring finger, resulting in a 40-50% permanent loss of use of his left hand.

Personal InjuryNegligencePremises LiabilityDuty of CareProximate CauseForeseeabilityJury VerdictDamagesExcessive DamagesAppellate Review
References
14
Case No. ADJ7042967
Regular
Jul 08, 2013

RAFAEL HERNANDEZ MOYADO vs. A 1 COAST RENTALS; ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS; MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order dismissing a lien claim filed by Agency Rehab (represented by Innovative Medical Management). The lien was dismissed for failure to pay the required lien activation fee, as mandated by Labor Code §4903.06. The WCJ found no merit to the lien claimant's argument that electronic system errors excused the payment. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's report and found the petition lacked merit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportdenial of reconsiderationdismissal on the meritslien claimantlien activation feeEAMS systemLabor Code §4903.06lien conference
References
0
Case No. ADJ1628806 (LBO 0395075)
Regular
Jul 08, 2014

MARIA MOYA vs. SUNRISE SENIOR LIVING, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration because it was skeletal and failed to state any legal grounds or specific references to the record. The petition challenged sanctions imposed by the WCJ, including attorney's fees, but did not meet the procedural requirements for reconsideration. The WCAB emphasized that such petitions must detail specific legal arguments and evidentiary support. Consequently, the lien claimant's arguments regarding untimely Bill of Particulars and unreasonable attorney's fees were not considered on their merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantSanctionsCompromise and ReleaseSkeletal PetitionBill of ParticularsAttorney's FeesLabor CodeCalifornia Code of Regulations
References
0
Case No. GRO 33581
Regular
Nov 07, 2007

NORMA SALGADO vs. SEA PINES GOLF RESORT, EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend a prior award, adding a finding that the applicant is entitled to reimbursement for vocational rehabilitation expert costs. While the Board affirmed the $10\%$ permanent disability rating, it found merit in the applicant's argument regarding expert costs, citing Labor Code $\S 5811$. The applicant's challenges to the permanent disability rating and the legality of the 2005 Schedule for Rating Permanent Disabilities were otherwise rejected due to insufficient argument and reliance on an unpublished decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardvocational rehabilitation expertAlbert RivasM.A.reimbursement for coststemporary disabilitypermanent disability2005 Schedule for Rating Permanent DisabilitiesCosta v. Hardy DiagnosticLabor Code § 5811
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 1987

Perna Carting Corp. v. Private Sanitation Union

The petitioner appealed an order that granted their application to stay arbitration only partially, specifically concerning disputes arising after December 1, 1984. The core of the petitioner's argument was that the respondent Union had never represented the majority of the bargaining unit, thereby invalidating their collective bargaining agreements. However, the court unanimously affirmed the prior decision, finding this argument without merit. It emphasized the presumption of continuing validity for such agreements and distinguished the petitioner's cited case law. Ultimately, the court concluded that the petitioner's evidence was insufficient to prove the Union represented only a minority of workers.

Collective Bargaining AgreementArbitrationUnion RepresentationContract ValidityPresumption of ValidityLabor LawAppellate DecisionSupreme CourtNew York
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

S. Strauss, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 342

S. Strauss, Inc. filed a motion to stay arbitration initiated by the United Food and Commercial Workers’ Union, Local 342. Strauss argued the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) was a 'sham' and its arbitration clause unenforceable. The District Court denied the motion, applying the doctrine of collateral estoppel based on a previous Southern District of New York ruling that affirmed the CBA's validity. The court also rejected Strauss's 'sham' argument on its merits and dismissed the 'primary jurisdiction' doctrine argument. Consequently, Strauss's motion was denied and the case dismissed.

Labor LawArbitrationCollective BargainingContract DisputeCollateral EstoppelIssue PreclusionFederal CourtsUnion RepresentationMotion PracticeInjunctive Relief
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2017

Hecklerco, LLC v. YuuZoo Corp.

Plaintiffs Hecklerco LLC, James Heckler, and Andrew Heckler brought an action against multiple defendants, including Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC and YuuZoo Corporation Limited, alleging federal securities fraud, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract stemming from their purchase of YuuZoo shares and a loan. The YuuZoo Defendants moved for an order certifying the Court’s May 11, 2017 order for appeal to the Second Circuit and for reconsideration of that order. The Court denied both motions. It found no controlling question of law for appeal and that the arguments for reconsideration, based on allegedly new evidence and prior denial of a reply, lacked merit as the evidence was not new and the arguments had been previously considered.

Interlocutory AppealReconsideration MotionPersonal JurisdictionFederal Securities FraudAgency RelationshipSouthern District of New YorkSecond Circuit Court of AppealsMotion to DismissShare PurchaseLoan Agreement
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 1993

In re the Claim of Regan

The claimant was discharged from their position as a loader at a beverage plant due to insubordination and argumentative conduct with supervisors on multiple occasions. Subsequently, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denied the claimant's application for unemployment insurance benefits, concluding that the termination resulted from misconduct. The claimant appealed this decision, asserting that the Board erroneously relied on the factual findings from an arbitration award and that they were not afforded a full and fair opportunity to litigate the discharge issue. The court found no merit in the claimant's arguments, noting that the same claims were previously raised and rejected in prior federal litigation concerning the arbitration award. Consequently, the Board's decision, which was supported by the arbitrator's findings of willful misconduct, was affirmed based on the principle of collateral estoppel.

MisconductInsubordinationUnemployment BenefitsArbitrationCollateral EstoppelJudicial ReviewLabor DisputeDue ProcessEmployment TerminationAdministrative Appeal
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 03, 1994

New York County Data Entry Worker Product Liability Litigation v. A.B. Dick Co.

In the case of Hulse v. A.B. Dick Co., a products liability action concerning repetitive stress injury, the Supreme Court, New York County, granted the plaintiffs' motion for a protective order preventing the preverdict disclosure of settlement materials to non-settling defendants. The appellate court affirmed this decision. The court reasoned that the settlement materials were not 'material and necessary' to the defense, with the exception of the settlement amount for post-verdict apportionment under General Obligations Law § 15-108. The court also rejected the arguments that the materials were useful for assessing settlement exposure or impeachment, deeming such uses speculative. Finally, the court found no merit in the argument that settlement proceeds constituted a collateral source under CPLR 4545 (c).

Products LiabilityRepetitive Stress InjuryProtective OrderSettlement AgreementConfidentialityDiscoveryApportionmentCollateral Source RuleImpeachmentTrial Strategy
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Appley v. American Food

A claimant's 2003 work-related injury was classified as a permanent partial disability in 2009. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) ordered the employer's carrier to deposit the present value of the uncapped benefit award into the aggregate trust fund, a decision the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed. Subsequently, the WCLJ issued a supplemental decision specifying a lump-sum payment of $111,182.53. The employer appealed this supplemental decision, raising arguments identical to its first appeal, prompting the Board to not only reject the arguments but also penalize the employer for a frivolous appeal. The appellate court reviewed the Board's decision and reversed the penalty, concluding that the employer's rationale for the second appeal, though ultimately lacking merit, was not frivolous given the timing of a clarifying Board policy regarding statutory stays during appeals.

Workers' CompensationAggregate Trust FundLump-sum PaymentFrivolous AppealPenalty ReversalStatutory StayPre-2007 AmendmentsDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewBoard Decision
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 3,735 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