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. ADJ10068763, ADJ10567862, ADJ10694876, ADJ10758465
Regular
Jul 03, 2016

NAHIDEH SARRAFIEH vs. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal due to a procedural error by the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The WCJ erroneously set the case for trial after issuing a confusing "Notice of Hearing Cancellation" which led applicant's counsel to believe the hearing was cancelled. Despite applicant's counsel appearing and objecting, the WCJ proceeded to set the trial, failing to provide adequate notice. The Appeals Board rescinded the trial setting order and remanded the case for a new Mandatory Settlement Conference to ensure proper notice and preparation.

Petition for RemovalNotice of Hearing CancellationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDue ProcessObjectionsTrial SettingRescind OrderReturn for MSCWCJ OpinionAppeals Board Decision
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Trojcak v. Valiant Millwrighting & Warehousing, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision concerning the proper cancellation of an employer's workers' compensation policy. A claimant was injured in September 1995, leading to a dispute when the carrier claimed the policy was canceled in June 1995 due to nonpayment. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge ruled the policy was improperly canceled, citing Banking Law § 576 and estoppel. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, finding the cancellation adhered to Banking Law § 576's notice requirements. This appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the statutory notice provisions were met and that the finance agency and carrier were not estopped from canceling the policy despite prior acceptance of late payments.

Workers' Compensation Policy CancellationBanking Law § 576Estoppel DoctrineNotice RequirementsLate PaymentsInsurance Coverage DisputePolicy DefaultAppellate ReviewStatutory CompliancePremium Finance Agreement
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 12, 2000

Claim of Lash v. General Motors Corp.

Claimant, an electrician, developed occupational hearing loss after working for General Motors Corporation and then American Axle. A claim was filed, leading to a Workers’ Compensation Board decision to apportion the award between the two employers. General Motors appealed, arguing American Axle failed to provide statutory notice for apportionment. The court affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that General Motors' actual knowledge of the claimant's preexisting hearing loss was equivalent to the required statutory notice under Workers’ Compensation Law § 49-ee, thereby permitting the apportionment of the claim.

Occupational Hearing LossWorkers' CompensationApportionmentActual KnowledgeStatutory NoticeLast Employer LiabilityNew York LawEmployer ResponsibilityPreexisting ConditionHearing Test
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cancel v. Mazzuca

Plaintiff Frankie Cancel, a Shi'a Muslim state prisoner, filed a civil rights action against thirty-one New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) employees, alleging violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to religious freedom and retaliation. Cancel claimed that DOCS's Islamic authorities, allegedly Sunni, discriminated against Shi'a inmates by denying separate religious services and proselytizing. The court addressed motions for partial summary judgment by Cancel and dismissal by defendants. The court dismissed most defendants and state law claims, finding that only claims against Imam Umar and Imam At-Tayeb survived dismissal for alleged direct discrimination and retaliation. It applied collateral estoppel to state court findings regarding significant doctrinal differences between Shi'a and Sunni Islam and violations of New York Correction Law § 610, but noted no preclusive effect on the federal constitutional claims. The court denied a motion to transfer venue, citing the burden of split trials.

Prisoner RightsReligious FreedomFirst AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentCivil Rights ActionDOCS (Department of Correctional Services)Shi'a IslamSunni IslamRetaliation ClaimsQualified Immunity
References
40
Case No. Misc. No. 254
En Banc
Sep 21, 2011

vs. Daniel Escamilla

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a Notice of Hearing to consider suspending or removing Daniel Escamilla's privilege to appear as a representative, citing a history of sanctions for bad-faith actions, frivolous tactics, and causing unnecessary delays.

Labor Code Section 4907Privilege SuspensionRepresentative MisconductBad Faith ActionsFrivolous PleadingsMisrepresentations of FactAppeals Board RulesState Bar RulesWCJ SanctionsHearing Representative
References
28
Case No. Misc. No. 254
Significant
Sep 21, 2011

vs. Daniel Escamilla, Respondent

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice of hearing to consider suspending or removing Daniel Escamilla's privilege to appear as a representative due to a pattern of bad-faith actions, frivolous tactics, and misrepresentations of fact across multiple cases.

Labor Code section 4907Privilege suspensionRemoval of privilegeBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsUnnecessary delayWillful non-complianceMisrepresentation of factSanctionsHearing representative
References
17
Case No. Misc. No. 254
En Banc
Sep 21, 2011

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA vs. Daniel Escamilla

Notice of a hearing to consider suspending or removing Daniel Escamilla's privilege to appear before the WCAB due to a pattern of repeated sanctions for bad-faith actions, frivolous tactics, and filing pleadings with false statements of fact.

Labor Code 4907Privilege SuspensionRemoval of PrivilegeBad Faith ActionsFrivolous TacticsUnnecessary DelayWillful Non-ComplianceDisruption of ProceedingsMeritleless ArgumentsSanctions
References
28
Case No. Misc. No. 254
Significant
Sep 21, 2011

vs. Daniel Escamilla

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice for a hearing to consider the suspension or removal of Daniel Escamilla's privilege to appear as a representative, citing a history of repeated sanctions for frivolous petitions, bad-faith tactics, and misrepresentations of fact in multiple cases.

Labor Code section 4907Suspension of privilegeRemoval of privilegeRepresentative privilegeBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsUnnecessary delayWillful non-complianceMisrepresentation of factSanctions
References
26
Case No. ADJ3049369
Regular
Oct 22, 2013

LONA REED vs. SIERRA TELECOMMUNICATIONS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration, upholding the dismissal of MH Express Pharmacy's lien claim. The lien claimant failed to appear at a properly noticed hearing in case ADJ3049369, despite initiating the hearing process. The Board clarified that a cancellation notice for a different case (ADJ643038) did not apply to this matter, and no valid reason for the absence was presented. Consequently, the WCJ's order dismissing the lien was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportcumulative traumaspecific injurylien conferenceOrder Dismissing LienMH Express PharmacyCIGADOR
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Capone v. Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District

The petitioner, an employee of Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District (UFSD), was terminated after two adult students reported sexually explicit conversations and offers of sexual acts from him. The UFSD charged the petitioner with 18 specifications of misconduct under Civil Service Law §75. Following a hearing where 17 charges were sustained, the hearing officer recommended termination, which the UFSD adopted. The petitioner initiated an article 78 proceeding, arguing insufficient notice, lack of substantial evidence, and an excessively severe penalty. The court confirmed the determination, finding the charges adequate, supported by substantial evidence from student testimonies, and that termination was not disproportionate given precedent, despite the petitioner's previously unblemished 19-year record.

Employment terminationSexual misconductAdministrative reviewCivil Service LawSufficiency of evidencePenalty proportionalityArticle 78Due processHearing officer findingsPublic education employee
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 5,127 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