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. ADJ8518632
Regular
May 09, 2017

HORACIO MONTOYA vs. CBC FRAMING, INC., ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, A B GALLAGHER BASSETT

The WCAB granted the defendant's Petition for Removal regarding a prior WCJ order compelling a Functional Capacity Evaluation. Removal was granted because the WCJ's order was based on a medical report that had not been formally admitted into evidence, preventing meaningful review. The Board will now admit the defendant's medical report into evidence for the limited purpose of determining the Petition for Removal. This action is an extraordinary remedy due to the prejudice caused by relying on unadmitted evidence.

RemovalFunctional Capacity EvaluationIndustrial InjuryPrejudiceIrreparable HarmAdmitted EvidenceQualified Medical EvaluationExhibit AAdministrative Law JudgePetition for Removal
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 02, 2002

Mayancela v. Almat Realty Development, LLC

This case concerns an appeal of an order from the Supreme Court, New York County, dated April 2, 2002. The order had granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and denied the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on the same claim. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision. The dismissal was based on the "recalcitrant worker" defense, as the plaintiff admitted misusing an A-frame ladder despite explicit instructions. The court also rejected the plaintiff's attempt to contradict his prior deposition testimony with a post-deposition affidavit.

Recalcitrant Worker DefenseSummary JudgmentLabor LawLadder AccidentDeposition TestimonySelf-Serving AffidavitAppellate ReviewNew York LawPersonal Injury
References
2
Case No. ADJ3390481 (LBO 0329915) ADJ4485849 (LBO 0338530) ADJ4560133 (LBO 0338531)
Regular
Feb 06, 2017

GILDARDO PATINO vs. TERRA PAVE, INC., ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding a prior Findings and Order (F&O). The defendant argued the original F&O, which admitted all exhibits over objection and deferred further depositions, would cause significant prejudice. The WCAB agreed with the judge's report recommending removal and substituted its own order. This new order allows the defendant to conduct further depositions of the applicant and the Agreed Medical Evaluator, Roger Sohn, M.D., while still admitting all exhibits into evidence.

Petition for RemovalFindings and OrderAgreed Medical EvaluatorWCJWCABFurther DepositionsIndustrial InjuryTerra PaveArrowood Indemnity CompanyState Compensation Insurance Fund
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bell Aircraft Corp. v. Siegler

The court affirmed both the final and intermediate orders without costs in this matter. The case primarily involved an appeal from an order that had found several defendants guilty of criminal contempt of court. Additionally, the appeal also addressed an order which denied a motion seeking to resettle an order of commitment. Furthermore, a motion to vacate and perpetually stay the orders of commitment was also denied. All presiding judges concurred with the decision.

Criminal ContemptOrder of CommitmentResettlement MotionVacate MotionStay OrdersAppellate ReviewOrder AffirmedJudicial Concurrence
References
1
Case No. ADJ771677 (VNO 0438444)
Regular
Jul 21, 2009

VITALINO AJVIX vs. STRICTLY WHOLESALE SIGNS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's order reducing a medical lien claim due to an inadequate trial record and procedural defects. The Board found that no evidence was formally admitted and the WCJ's order was improperly issued to "assist in settlement." The matter is returned for further proceedings and a new decision on the merits of the lien claim. Additionally, the Appeals Board removed the case on its own motion to consider sanctions against the lien claimant's representative for alleged misstatements of law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimReconsiderationRemovalSanctionsCMS NetworkRandal HollienLabor Code section 3202.5Labor Code section 5310Labor Code section 5813
References
1
Case No. ADJ9499148
Regular
Mar 28, 2018

GUMERCINDO ANGUIANO ARAUJO vs. YUKON PLASTERING, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's order disallowing lien claimant's lien. The original order dismissing the lien was based on insufficient evidence in the record, as no testimony was taken and no exhibits were formally admitted into evidence. The Board found the verification defect in the petition for reconsideration to be non-jurisdictional and not prejudicial to the defendant. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record and properly admit evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantStipulation Award OrderLabor Code section 5402Date of InjuryPretrial Conference StatementAdmitted EvidenceRecord of ProceedingsWCAB Rule 10750(a)Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation
References
3
Case No. ADJ9841623
Regular
Nov 04, 2016

JERRY RAMOS MELCHOR vs. ROLLINS, dba ORKIN LLC, SEDGWICK

Defendant Orkin LLC sought removal of a WCJ's order for an additional Qualified Medical Examiner (QME) panel in orthopedics. The Appeals Board granted removal because the WCJ's decision was not based on admitted evidence in the record. The WCJ improperly issued the panel without a trial despite defendant's objection. The Board rescinded the order and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings, emphasizing that submitted documents must be admitted into evidence.

References
6
Case No. ADJ10765144
Regular
Aug 07, 2019

CARLOS CHAVEZ vs. CAM CONSTRUCTION PARTNERS INC., CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY C/O BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding that the WCJ's May 7, 2019 Findings and Order lacked a factual basis in the admitted evidence. The Board rescinded the F&O and returned the case for further proceedings due to the absence of admitted evidence supporting the order for an additional neurological QME panel. The Board deemed the removal petition timely despite unclear service of the F&O to ensure substantial justice.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorNeurologyOrthopedicsFindings and OrderService of ProcessTimelinessIrreparable HarmSubstantial EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
13
Case No. ADJ8167175; ADJ8167184
Regular
Aug 28, 2019

SHAKEH DARZIAN vs. GMZ PHARMACY, INC., EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal, rescinded the WCJ's April 16, 2019 Finding and Order, and returned the matter for further proceedings. Removal was granted because the applicant demonstrated potential irreparable harm and lack of due process. The WCJ's order for a replacement QME panel lacked supporting admitted evidence, violating the principle that decisions must be based on the evidentiary record. Therefore, the Appeals Board found the absence of admitted evidence regarding discovery issues and the need for a replacement panel prevented a fair and supported decision.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluatorspsychiatry paneldue processtimely discoveryirreparable harmfair hearingadmitted evidencesubstantial evidenceWCJ Report
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 20, 1999

Siby v. A&Z Car Wash Sales

The Supreme Court, Bronx County, affirmed an order granting summary judgment to the defendant-respondent in a personal injury action. The plaintiff, an employee of a car wash, sustained injuries when his sleeve and hand were caught in a conveyor chain while attempting to correct an alignment issue. The court found no evidence that the defendant's installed wiring and electrical system caused the accident. The plaintiff admitted not deactivating the conveyor system despite accessible on/off switches and a lockout key. Expert testimony regarding insufficient shutdown time and the need for automatic stops was deemed irrelevant or conclusory, as the plaintiff had the means to fully deactivate the system. No industry or regulatory standards were provided to support claims of inadequate warning time.

Personal InjuryCar Wash AccidentSummary JudgmentConveyor SystemElectrical SystemWorkplace SafetyNegligenceCausationExpert TestimonyOn/Off Switch
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 24,266 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