Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ9171209

Regular

Mar 19, 2019

MARIA VILLICANA vs. MOPKIN, uninsured, MITSUWA MARKETPLACE, SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding that neither party can unilaterally withdraw from a fully executed Compromise and Release settlement agreement before it is approved or disapproved. The Board rescinded the prior order suspending the settlement and clarified that the agreement remains binding until a formal decision is made. The case was returned to the trial level for a hearing to determine the adequacy of the settlement. The applicant's original finding, stating she could not withdraw, was affirmed but amended to apply to both parties.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationUninsured EmployerMitsuwa MarketplaceSompo Japan InsuranceBroadsireWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAdequacy of SettlementDue Process

References

Case No. ADJ4016080 (VNO 0496113)

Regular

Sep 08, 2009

SUZANNE KUYUMDZHYAN vs. JONS MARKETPLACE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration for both the defendant and lien claimant concerning an Amended Findings and Award. The original decision awarded the lien claimant payment for 18.5 hours of interpreting services, but the defendant argued the lien claimant failed to prove reasonableness and necessity of the services. The Board found the record undeveloped regarding the reasonableness and necessity of Dr. Rahimi's treatment and consequently, the derivative interpreting services. Therefore, the matter is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Findings and AwardLien claimantInterpreting servicesCertified interpreterReasonable and necessary treatmentMedical-legal reportsCompromise and ReleaseBurden of proof

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Macy's, Inc. v. J.C. Penney Corp.

This consolidated action involves Macy's (and its subsidiary MMG) suing J.C. Penney (JCP) for tortious interference with an exclusive licensing agreement Macy's had with Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSLO). Macy's held exclusive rights to Martha Stewart brands and designs in certain product categories. JCP intentionally induced MSLO to breach this contract by offering significant financial incentives and collaborating on designs for JCP-branded products to be sold in 'MSLO Stores' within JCP. The court found JCP liable for tortious interference, stating their conduct exceeded 'a minimum level of ethical behavior in the marketplace.' While initial injunctive reliefs were settled or withdrawn, the court referred the determination of damages and attorney's fees to a judicial hearing officer, but denied punitive damages.

Contract DisputeTortious InterferenceExclusivity ClauseLicensing AgreementRetail IndustryBrand ExclusivityBusiness EthicsCorporate MisconductNon-CompeteDamages

References

Case No. SI 14 Cr. 68(KBF)

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 22, 2014

United States v. Ulbricht

This Opinion & Order addresses motions in limine filed by both the Government and defendant Ross Ulbricht in case SI 14 Cr. 68(KBF). Ulbricht is charged with narcotics trafficking, computer hacking, fraudulent identification documents, and running a continuing criminal enterprise related to the online marketplace Silk Road. The Court denied Ulbricht's motions to preclude evidence concerning Silk Road product listings, murder-for-hire solicitations, and fraudulent identification documents, finding them relevant to the charged offenses and Ulbricht's identity. Conversely, the Court granted Ulbricht's motion to preclude certain miscellaneous exhibits and denied the Government's motion to admit evidence of uncharged contraband, citing irrelevance and undue prejudice. The Government's motions regarding potential consequences of conviction and defendant's political views were denied as moot.

Silk RoadRoss UlbrichtMotions In LimineEvidence AdmissibilityNarcotics TraffickingComputer Hacking ConspiracyFraudulent Identification DocumentsMurder-for-Hire SolicitationRule 404(b) EvidenceRule 403 Balancing

References

Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 29122

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 26, 2019

Angiolillo v. Christie's, Inc.

This case concerns the ownership of the "Princie Diamond," a valuable pink diamond auctioned by Christie's for over $39 million. Plaintiffs, heirs of Senator Renato Angiolillo, allege the diamond was unlawfully converted following the death of the Senator's second wife. They claim rightful ownership and seek recovery. Defendants argue they obtained good title under Swiss law and that the conversion claim is time-barred. The court denied the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion and largely denied the defendants' cross-motion, except for dismissing the replevin claim against Christie's due to its lack of possession. Crucially, the court held that New York law, not Swiss law, governs the dispute, emphasizing New York's compelling interest in preserving the integrity of its art market and preventing it from becoming a marketplace for stolen goods. Additionally, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery regarding Christie's internal investigation into the diamond's provenance, citing "at-issue waiver."

Art DisputeStolen PropertyChoice of LawConversionReplevinSummary JudgmentDiscovery DisputeAttorney-Client PrivilegeSanctionsDiamond Auction

References

Showing 1-5 of 5 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

MARIA VILLICANA vs. MOPKIN, uninsured, MITSUWA MARKETPLACE, SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, BROADSPIRE

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationUninsured EmployerMitsuwa MarketplaceSompo Japan InsuranceBroadsireWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAdequacy of SettlementDue Process

SUZANNE KUYUMDZHYAN vs. JONS MARKETPLACE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

Macy's, Inc. v. J.C. Penney Corp.

Contract DisputeTortious InterferenceExclusivity ClauseLicensing AgreementRetail IndustryBrand ExclusivityBusiness EthicsCorporate MisconductNon-CompeteDamages

United States v. Ulbricht

Angiolillo v. Christie's, Inc.

Art DisputeStolen PropertyChoice of LawConversionReplevinSummary JudgmentDiscovery DisputeAttorney-Client PrivilegeSanctionsDiamond Auction