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

New York City Department of Social Services v. Oscar C.

This case examines whether the Family Court properly utilized a dual burden of proof in a child neglect proceeding involving two Indian children. The Family Court applied the 'preponderance of the evidence' standard during the fact-finding phase and the 'clear and convincing evidence' standard during the dispositional phase. The appellant father argued that the Federal Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) preempted New York State law, requiring the 'clear and convincing' standard for both phases. The court concluded that the ICWA does not preempt State law when the State law offers a higher standard of protection, and that New York's dual burden of proof can be harmonized with the ICWA's provisions. The court affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding no conflict with federal law regarding the application of these standards.

Indian Child Welfare ActChild Neglect ProceedingDual Burden of ProofPreemption DoctrineFamily Court JurisdictionFact-Finding StandardDispositional StandardParental RightsIndigenous ChildrenAlaska Native Village
References
13
Case No. ADJ9715211, ADJ7823437
Regular
Apr 13, 2015

OSCAR MILLAN vs. SKB CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration in the case of Oscar Millan v. SKB Corporation. Although the petition was not in the proper format, it was deemed timely filed as an e-filed verified letter on January 30, 2015. The WCAB reviewed the merits of the petition, as stated in the judge's report, but ultimately found no grounds for reconsideration of the prior order. Therefore, the defendant's petition was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationReport and Recommendationworkers' compensation administrative law judgeJoint Order Approving Compromise and ReleaseElectronic Adjudication Management Systemtimely filedverified letterAmbika SapraSapra & Navarra LLP
References
0
Case No. ADJ9298865
Regular
Oct 14, 2019

Oscar Scagliotti vs. Elmore Toyota

This case concerns Oscar Scagliotti's claim of retaliatory termination by Elmore Toyota in violation of Labor Code section 132a. The Appeals Board rescinded the prior decision, finding that Scagliotti established a prima facie case by showing his termination occurred immediately after he left work for industrial injury treatment. The Board found Elmore Toyota's stated reason of leaving without permission was not credible and contradicted by the close temporal proximity to his injury notification and deviation from standard procedures. Compensation and penalties are deferred pending further proceedings at the trial level.

Labor Code 132aRetaliationDiscriminationIndustrial InjuryPrima Facie ClaimTerminationReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMedical TreatmentDisadvantageous Treatment
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Joselyn D. v. Oscar O.

Oscar O. died before the birth of his child with Joselyn D., prompting a paternity petition. Family Court Act § 518 seemingly mandated abatement of the petition upon the father's death. However, the court interpreted the statute in a gender-neutral manner to defeat abatement, citing constitutional equal protection concerns. The court concluded that a gender-neutral reading better serves the legislative intent of expanding paternity proceeding opportunities and eliminating distinctions between marital and non-marital children. A finding of paternity was made based on clear and convincing evidence. The court also urged the Legislature to amend FCA § 518 to be explicitly gender-neutral.

PaternityGender NeutralityEqual ProtectionStatutory ConstructionAbatement of ActionFamily LawConstitutional LawNon-marital Children's RightsStatutory InterpretationJudicial Activism
References
18
Case No. ADJ6923711
Regular
May 02, 2013

OSCAR VIZCARRA vs. APPLIED RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Oscar Vizcarra's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on March 28, 2013, which was more than twenty days after the WCJ's decision was personally served on February 28, 2013. Because the decision was personally served, no mailing extension applied. The WCAB correctly applied Labor Code section 5903, noting that filing a petition for reconsideration outside the jurisdictional time limit mandates dismissal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Jurisdictional Time LimitPersonally ServedMailing ExtensionCode of Civil Procedure Section 1013WCAB Rule 10507Date of Receipt
References
7
Case No. ADJ7600061
Regular
Jan 25, 2012

OSCAR ESPINOZA vs. IDEC CORPORATION, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Oscar Espinoza's Petition for Removal. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the administrative law judge's report, finding no grounds for removal. The decision was issued on January 25, 2012.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportADJ7600061IDEC CorporationTravelers Insurance CompanyDenying RemovalSan Francisco District OfficeApplicantDefendants
References
0
Case No. ADJ9402316
Regular
Aug 02, 2019

OSCAR SANDOVAL vs. THE STRIP JOINT, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves applicant Oscar Sandoval seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision that denied his claim for injury to his head, jaw/teeth, psyche, and sleep disorder. The WCAB denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the medical reports submitted by applicant's physicians lacked substantial evidence. Specifically, the WCAB found that Dr. Schames' report was based on an inadequate medical history, Dr. Reichwald's report was internally inconsistent and lacked review of sufficient medical records, and Dr. Saeid's report did not sufficiently explain his diagnosis of insomnia.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJmedical-legal reportssubstantial evidenceorthopedicpsychologicalinternal medicinecervical spine
References
9
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 05466 [129 AD3d 1058]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 24, 2015

Torres v. St. Francis College

Oscar Torres, a janitor, sustained personal injuries after falling from a ladder while cleaning a basketball backboard at St. Francis College. He, along with his wife, brought an action against St. Francis College alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 240 (1). The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to the defendant, dismissing these causes of action. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the judgment, finding that the injured plaintiff's work constituted routine maintenance not covered by Labor Law § 240 (1). The court also found no evidence that the defendant created or had notice of a dangerous condition, or had the authority to supervise the plaintiff's work methods, thus dismissing claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence.

Personal InjuryLabor LawWorkplace SafetySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewRoutine MaintenanceElevation RisksCommon-Law NegligenceLadder FallPremises Liability
References
17
Case No. ADJ10871261
Regular
Nov 28, 2018

OSCAR GONZALEZ vs. TRES GENERACIONES, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE administered by RISICO CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Oscar Gonzalez's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed electronically via EAMS after 5 p.m. on the last day it could be deemed timely. Therefore, it was legally deemed filed on the next court day, making it late. The WCAB has no jurisdiction to consider untimely petitions.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingEAMSJurisdictional Time LimitDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings of FactService MethodCredibility DeterminationsWCJ Report
References
5
Case No. ADJ10887310
Regular
Jan 30, 2023

OSCAR MARTINEZ vs. SECURITA AMERICA, INC., GALLAGHER BASSETT, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE

The applicant, Oscar Martinez, was injured on May 3, 2017, resulting in a 3% permanent disability. He returned to his regular job duties with his employer, Securita America, Inc., but was laid off approximately five months later due to his employer's contract ending. While Martinez subsequently worked for a new employer at the same location and performing similar duties, the Board found that this did not satisfy the requirement of returning to the "same job for the same employer" for at least 12 months. Therefore, the Appeals Board amended the prior finding, ruling that Martinez is entitled to a Supplemental Job Displacement Benefit (SJDB) voucher.

Supplemental Job Displacement BenefitSJDB voucherpermanent partial disabilityemployer's dutyregular work offermodified work offeralternative work offer12-month durationRule 10133.31(c)substantial evidence
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 59 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