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. ADJ1186781 (VNO 0516635) ADJ1590743 (VNO 0552326)
Regular
Jun 10, 2013

DANA BONSALL vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured

Defendant County of Los Angeles petitioned to set aside an order compelling payment of $14,500 to lien claimant, The 4600 Group. The defendant argued the order was based on mistake, as they were unaware of prior payments made to Burbank Podiatry, which was part of the lien claim. Crucially, the assigned judge realized she was disqualified due to previously serving as defense counsel in this matter. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the prior order, and remanded the case to a new judge to determine if the settlement should be set aside.

WCABPetition to Set AsideStipulation and OrderLien ClaimantWCJ DisqualificationRule 9721.12(c)(2)Good CauseRescinded OrderRemandBurbank Podiatry
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 1 of United Food & Com'l Workers v. Heinrich Motors

This action concerns the enforcement of an arbitration award. Orest Poliszuk, a used car salesman for Heinrich Motors Inc., was discharged after an injury. The Union filed a grievance, leading to an arbitration award by V. Sumner Carroll, who ordered Poliszuk reinstated with back wages from February 16, 1981, to May 6, 1981. The collective bargaining agreement, however, stipulated that no award could be retroactive beyond the grievance filing date, which was March 23, 1981. The District Court found that Arbitrator Carroll exceeded his authority by awarding back pay prior to the grievance date, as this disregarded the express contractual language. Consequently, the court partially vacated the arbitration award concerning back wages prior to March 23, 1981, and confirmed the award in all other respects.

Arbitration Award EnforcementCollective Bargaining AgreementLabor Management Relations ActWrongful DischargeBack Pay DisputeArbitrator AuthorityJudicial Review of ArbitrationContract InterpretationRetroactive PayGrievance Procedure
References
5
Case No. ADJ7781989; ADJ8262771
Regular
Oct 03, 2013

MIRIAN GARCIA vs. COOPER COLD FOODS, INC., ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY as administrator for STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is granting reconsideration of its own prior decision and rescinding a July 23, 2013 decision that had overturned a prior finding of 2% permanent disability for applicant's right knee injury. The WCAB determined that its August 9, 2012 order granting reconsideration was improvidently granted because the applicant had already filed a successive and improper petition for reconsideration. Consequently, the prior order and the subsequent rescinded decision are vacated, and the applicant's petition for reconsideration is dismissed.

WCABReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgePermanent DisabilityIndustrial InjurySuccessive PetitionImprovidently GrantedVacated
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 20, 2003

Consilvio v. Alan L.

The Supreme Court reversed a prior order that would have transferred a respondent from the Kirby Forensic Psychiatric Center, a secure facility, to a nonsecure psychiatric facility. The respondent had been confined since March 1998 after being adjudicated not responsible for crimes including rape, sexual abuse, kidnapping, and robbery. The court found that the respondent continued to suffer from a dangerous mental disorder, specifically antisocial personality disorder, and posed a physical danger to himself or others, contrary to the lower court's finding. Psychological evaluations indicated a high risk of reoffending due to a persistent lack of insight, remorse, and resistance to therapy. Consequently, the court granted the hospital's petition for a subsequent retention order, authorizing continued custody in a secure setting.

Antisocial Personality DisorderRetention OrderSecure Psychiatric FacilityNonsecure Psychiatric FacilityCriminal Procedure Law 330.20Dangerous Mental DisorderSexual AbuseRapeKidnappingRobbery
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 1992

Arroyo v. Fourteen Estusia Corp.

The Supreme Court, Bronx County, issued an Order on March 17, 1992, which unanimously affirmed a lower court's decision. The order denied the defendants' cross-motion to compel the infant plaintiff, a four-year-old who witnessed her mother's rape, to appear for a deposition, citing potential trauma and unlikelihood of providing relevant information beyond her mother's testimony. Furthermore, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion to vacate the defendants' demand for a verified bill of particulars. The court found the 22-page demand, containing 200 requests, to be excessively detailed and improperly sought evidentiary material, warranting vacatur of the entire demand.

Infant plaintiffDepositionProtective orderBill of particularsVacate demandEvidentiary materialNegligent maintenanceSexual assaultTraumaSupreme Court
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 24, 1998

Zak v. United Parcel Service

An order from the Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 24, 1998, granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint, and initially denied the plaintiff's cross-motion to amend the bill of particulars as academic. The court later modified its decision to grant the plaintiff's cross-motion, while otherwise affirming the dismissal of the complaint. The plaintiff was injured by accidental power restoration to a conveyer belt. The Labor Law § 200 claim was dismissed due to the defendant's lack of supervisory control, and the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim, relying on 12 NYCRR 23-1.13 (b) (5), was dismissed because the plaintiff did not sustain an electrical shock, which is the specific hazard addressed by that code provision. The modification clarified that the claim under 12 NYCRR 23-1.13 (b) (5) was reviewed and rejected on the merits.

Summary judgmentLabor LawSupervisory controlIndustrial CodeElectrical injuryConveyer beltCross-motionBill of particularsPersonal injuryWorkplace accident
References
2
Case No. ADJ11896735; ADJ3117080
Regular
Jun 03, 2025

LORRAINE GONSALVES vs. FRONTIER MANAGEMENT LLC, CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CAMP FIRE USA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) addressed a petition for removal filed by Lorraine Gonsalves (applicant) after she filed a document challenging previous orders, which the Board treated as a petition for removal. The applicant had previously sought reconsideration of a February 18, 2025 decision related to ADJ11896735 and sought review of March 26, 2025 orders taking ADJ3117080 off calendar and continuing ADJ11896735. The Board dismissed the petition for removal, finding that the February 18, 2025 decision was a non-final, interlocutory order from which a petition for reconsideration could not be taken and that the petition was untimely. Regarding the March 26, 2025 orders, the Board determined the applicant had not shown substantial prejudice or irreparable harm to warrant removal.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJPWCJOff CalendarContinued TrialSet Aside OrderLack of ProsecutionTimelinessFinal Order
References
6
Case No. ADJ2244538 (LAO 0883304)
Regular
Jul 29, 2011

MELVIN ISAAC vs. PARAMOUNT PICTURES

This case involves the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) removing a matter on its own motion to review a Compromise and Release (C&R) order. The WCAB issued a Notice of Intention to approve the C&R with addenda, allowing parties 20 days to object. As no objections were received, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's prior approval and entered a new order approving the C&R with the addenda. The cases are now returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalCompromise and ReleaseAddendaWCJ OrderRescindedApprovedTrial LevelParamount PicturesMelvin Isaac
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 12, 1982

Naples v. Daubert Chemical Co.

This case involves multiple motions for a change of venue. An order entered June 23, 1981, denying defendant’s motion for a change of venue to Richmond County, was affirmed. An appeal from an order entered April 28, 1982, which denied a motion to change venue to Orange County, was dismissed as superseded. Finally, an order entered November 12, 1982, denying defendant’s motion for renewal of the April 28, 1982 order, was reversed. Upon renewal, the motion to change venue to Orange County was granted, as there was no nexus between New York County and the cause of action, and the accident occurred in Orange County where the plaintiff resided.

Change of VenueDiscretionary RulingSitus of ActionPlaintiff's ResidenceAttorney ConvenienceAppellate ReviewMotion for RenewalSupreme CourtNew York CountyOrange County
References
2
Case No. CA 10-02255
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 01, 2011

KOBEL, TIMOTHY M. v. NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION

Plaintiffs Timothy M. Kobel and Lisa H. Kobel commenced a Labor Law and common-law negligence action seeking damages for injuries sustained by Timothy M. Kobel after he slipped and fell backwards while working in a manhole. The defendant, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, appealed an order that denied in part its motion for summary judgment. The appellate court affirmed the denial of summary judgment for Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, citing the defendant's failure to establish a lack of notice regarding hazardous conditions. The court also affirmed the denial of dismissal for the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim based on 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d) regarding slippery working surfaces. However, the court modified the order by granting the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim based on 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (b) (1), ruling that the sump hole was not a sufficiently hazardous opening under the regulation.

Personal InjurySlipping HazardManhole AccidentWorkplace SafetySummary JudgmentAppellate DivisionFourth Judicial DepartmentErie CountyLabor Law Section 200Labor Law Section 241(6)
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 24,786 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