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
May 17, 2016

United States v. Nesbeth

Chevelle Nesbeth was convicted by a jury for importation of cocaine and possession with intent to distribute. Senior District Judge Block rendered a non-incarceratory sentence of one-year probation, with special conditions including six months' home confinement and 100 hours of community service. The judge wrote this opinion to emphasize the importance of considering the numerous statutory and regulatory collateral consequences facing Nesbeth as a convicted felon, such as restrictions on employment, housing, and voting. These consequences were extensively balanced against 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors to determine a just punishment. The opinion advocates for legal counsel and the Probation Department to proactively address collateral consequences in all future pre-sentence reports and sentencing proceedings.

Collateral ConsequencesSentencing ReformCriminal JusticeProbationary SentenceDrug Trafficking OffensesFelony ConvictionJudicial DiscretionFederal Sentencing GuidelinesRehabilitationRecidivism
References
55
Case No. 92 Civ. 4884 (RJW)
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Terry

This opinion addresses and denies two motions filed by defendant Randall Terry in connection with his criminal contempt trial. Terry sought the recusal of Senior District Judge Robert J. Ward, alleging personal bias based on the judge's comments during prior civil contempt hearings. The Court denied this motion, asserting that its observations stemmed from judicial proceedings and did not indicate an extrajudicial source of bias or create an appearance of impropriety. Terry also moved to present constitutional arguments as a defense against the preliminary injunction he allegedly violated. This motion was similarly denied under the collateral bar rule, which prohibits collateral attacks on court orders in contempt proceedings unless the order is "transparently invalid"—a standard the Court found was not met.

Criminal ContemptMotion to RecuseJudicial BiasCollateral Bar RuleFirst Amendment RightsPreliminary Injunction ViolationFederal ProcedureDue ProcessDisqualification of JudgeExtrajudicial Source Doctrine
References
21
Case No. ADJ635934
Regular
Sep 09, 2010

FRANCES LARUE vs. NORDMAN, CORMANY, HAIR & COMPTON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer in four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an administrative law judge's award finding permanent total disability and no apportionment for an applicant's back injury. The Board rescinded the award, finding the judge erred by relying on an orthopedist's opinion that failed to properly apportion disability to pre-existing scoliosis. The case is remanded for further proceedings to incorporate the apportionment opinion of the defendant's medical expert, who found 70% of the disability attributable to non-industrial scoliosis. A dissenting opinion argued that the defendant's medical expert's apportionment was also insufficient.

ApportionmentPermanent Total DisabilityQualified Medical EvaluatorOrthopedistDegenerative ScoliosisCausationLabor Code Section 4663Senate Bill 899Substantial EvidenceFindings and Award
References
2
Case No. ADJ2709955 (MON 0356320)
Regular
Jun 21, 2017

Mario Cocola vs. California Hospital Medical Center

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Mario Cocola's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that he sustained $69\%$ permanent disability from industrial injuries. Cocola argued the administrative judge erred by disregarding the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion that he was totally disabled from the open labor market due to orthopedic injuries. The Board agreed with the judge's report that the physician's opinion lacked sufficient objective basis for the change in work restrictions. A dissenting opinion argued the medical and vocational evidence supported a $100\%$ permanent disability finding and requested clarification from the medical examiner.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Awardpermanent disabilitycumulative traumalumbar spinecervical spinepsychecervicogenic headachesEmergency Unit CoordinatorAgreed Medical Examiner
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Abellon v. Nyack Hospital

The court affirmed the order of the Appellate Division for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice Norman L. Harvey. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, and Ciparick concurred with the decision, while Judge Titone took no part in the decision.

Court of AppealsAffirmationJudicial ReviewAppellate ProcedureConcurring OpinionNo Participation
References
2
Case No. ADJ1224829
Regular
Mar 22, 2018

MARTIN REYES vs. NORTHRIDGE EQUIPMENT RENTALS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case affirmed an administrative law judge's finding that the applicant is entitled to home health care based on the substantial medical opinions of Dr. Miller and Dr. Brourman. The defendant contended these opinions were not substantial evidence, but the Board found they were sufficient to establish the need for home health care. The Board also agreed with the administrative law judge that further development of the record was necessary to determine the precise hours and nature of the required home health care services. The defendant's duty to investigate the need for these services was also highlighted.

home health careagreed medical examinerAMEpain managementsubstantial evidenceDeclaration of Readinessexpedited hearingindustrial injurypermanently and totally disabledactivities of daily living
References
12
Case No. ADJ2030213; ADJ2904030; ADJ4232151
Regular
Oct 22, 2014

LETICIA SANCHEZ vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by lien claimant Dr. Elena Konstat regarding a workers' compensation award. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge. The judge found the opinion of Dr. Mory Framer more persuasive than Dr. Konstat's report, despite conflicting medical opinions. Dr. Framer concluded the applicant's psyche injury was non-industrial, while Dr. Konstat did not fully address pre-existing conditions or non-industrial stressors.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Reconsiderationsubstantial evidencelien claimantfindings and ordertimely petitionadmitted injuriesdenied body partspsyche injurypermanent disability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Billigmeier v. Cres Dry Wall

The court affirmed the order with costs, citing the reasoning detailed in the Appellate Division's memorandum. Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa all concurred with this decision. Judge Simons did not participate in the deliberation. This decision highlights the court's agreement with the lower court's findings without further elaboration in this specific opinion.

Order AffirmedAppellate Division DecisionConcurring OpinionCourt CostsJudicial Panel
References
2
Case No. ADJ9513119
Regular
Aug 01, 2018

JOHN CALLANAN vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the trial judge's take-nothing order due to insufficient factual and legal development regarding the applicant's psychiatric and internal injuries. The WCAB determined that further evidence is required to address causation and "actual events" of employment for the psychiatric claim, as well as to clarify opinions on specific versus cumulative trauma for both the psychiatric and internal injury claims. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the workers' compensation judge, with the WCAB expressing no final opinion on any substantive issue. The appeals board also noted potential issues with the good faith personnel action defense and the apportionment of impairment versus injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric InjuryActual Events of EmploymentCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryGood Faith Personnel ActionPanic AttackAnxietyInternal System InjuryDyspepsia
References
11
Case No. ADJ3918602 (SAC 0330507) ADJ272371 (SAC 0354775)
Regular
Apr 05, 2010

THOMAS MELTON vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought reconsideration of an award for spinal surgery recommended by the applicant's treating physician, Dr. Montesano. The defendant argued the administrative law judge should have favored the opinion of Dr. Reynolds, an agreed medical examiner. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding Dr. Montesano's opinion constituted substantial evidence supporting the award. The Board affirmed the judge's discretion to choose among conflicting medical reports.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoint Findings and AwardPermissibly Self-InsuredDeputy SheriffIndustrial InjuryLow BackSpinal SurgeryTreating PhysicianAgreed Medical ExaminerSecond Opinion Physician
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 22,663 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