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. ADJ686632 (LAO 0573956)
Regular
Sep 28, 2016

GARY TOBIA vs. LA PETITE BOULANGERIA, TRAVELERS CASUALTY \& SURETY COMPANY, BROADSPIRE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal and rescinded the WCJ's August 18, 2016 order compelling discovery. The Board found the order to be overly broad and issued without a sufficient record to weigh discovery disputes. Furthermore, the relevance of the requested documents, particularly those dating back to the 1980s, was not adequately established, especially as the sole outstanding issue appears to be medical treatment. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify outstanding issues and create a proper record for any future discovery orders.

Petition for RemovalMotion to QuashSubpoena Duces TecumWCJ OrderDiscovery DisputeClaims FileNon-Privileged RecordsEmployer's First Report of InjuryJob-Site PostingsMedical Treatment
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

American Fur Liners Contractors Ass'n v. Lucchi

The court considered whether Civil Practice Act section 882-a typically permits framing issues for a contempt proceeding. It was determined that under ordinary circumstances, it does not. However, the appellants, having themselves objected to proceeding without framed issues, were precluded from raising an objection on that ground. The court found the framed issues sufficient to address the questions presented in the case. Consequently, the order under appeal was unanimously affirmed, with associated costs and disbursements.

contempt of courtframing issuesappellate procedurecivil practice actunanimous affirmationprocedural objectionappellate costsjudicial review
References
0
Case No. ADJ3388311 (ANA 0384909)
Regular
Nov 27, 2017

SHARON WATT LeBLANC vs. APRIA HEALTHCARE, AIG

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's decision. The Board rescinded the original findings due to procedural issues, including the WCJ's failure to properly frame the issues of permanent disability and apportionment, and the lack of a clear finding on the psyche injury. The case is returned to the trial level for reframing of issues, development of the record, and a decision on all outstanding matters, including the contested temporary disability award.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityMedical TreatmentQualified Medical EvaluatorOrthopedist1997 Schedule2005 ScheduleApportionment
References
0
Case No. ADJ2250216 (AHM 0151781)
Regular
Nov 25, 2013

JOHN RANDLE vs. SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, MINNESOTA VIKINGS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a previous award, finding that while jurisdiction was proper and the statute of limitations was not a bar, the original decision failed to adequately address several issues. Specifically, the Board remanded the case to determine the proper defendant(s) and excluded the applicant's heart condition from permanent disability ratings due to insufficient medical evidence of industrial causation. The WCJ must also resolve other outstanding issues raised at trial before issuing a new decision.

John RandleSeattle SeahawksMinnesota Vikingsjurisdictioncontract of hirestatute of limitationscumulative traumaagreed medical evaluatorspermanent disabilityapportionment
References
28
Case No. ADJ3139011 (WCK 0039676) ADJ3737138 (WCK 0039682) ADJ2116694 (WCK 0039685)
Regular
Dec 09, 2008

Diane Pearson vs. Gray C Home Care, Republic Indemnity Company of America

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the original award and remanded the case for further proceedings to allow for full determination of all deferred issues. The WCAB agreed that the applicant is totally permanently disabled and ordered a new final decision addressing all outstanding issues, including potential cardiovascular injuries and medical necessity of mobility equipment, to clarify all injured body parts and potentially issue a non-apportioned award. This decision aims to ensure all relevant evidence is considered before a final determination of the applicant's entitlement to benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings Order and AwardAdministrative Law JudgePermanent DisabilityApportionmentLife PensionMedical NecessityDeep Vein ThrombosisStroke
References
0
Case No. 09 Civ. 3043(PAE)
Regular Panel Decision

Hart v. Rick's Cabaret International, Inc.

This Opinion & Order addresses several pre-trial issues in a class action lawsuit brought by exotic dancers against Rick’s Cabaret NY and related entities, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law concerning minimum wages and mandatory tip-out fees. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ruled that performance fees received by dancers cannot offset the Club’s liability for mandatory tip-out fees, which were deemed unlawful deductions under NYLL § 193(3)(a). The Court further affirmed that claims related to these tip-out fees are appropriate for class-wide resolution, consistent with the Mt. Clemens doctrine for calculating damages when employer records are insufficient. Finally, the defendants' motion for interlocutory appeal regarding class certification, the "reasonable customer" standard, and wage offset issues was denied, as the questions did not meet the criteria of 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Consequently, a single trial is scheduled for April 27, 2015, to resolve all outstanding jury issues.

Class ActionFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawMinimum WageTip-out FeesExotic DancersInterlocutory AppealClass CertificationDamages CalculationEmployer Liability
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 1995

Hickey v. C. D. Perry & Sons, Inc.

Plaintiff Roland E. Hickey, a labor supervisor, was injured after falling from a plank across a sluiceway at a dam construction site. He and his wife sued the owner, New York State Electric and Gas Corporation (NY-SEG), and the general contractor, C. D. Perry & Sons, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The defendants then filed a third-party action against Hickey's employer, Prepakt Concrete Company, for contribution and indemnification. Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of strict liability under Labor Law § 240 (1), while defendants cross-moved to dismiss this claim, asserting the "recalcitrant worker" defense. The Supreme Court denied both motions, finding unresolved factual questions. The appellate court affirmed the denial of the plaintiffs' motion, agreeing that factual issues persisted regarding whether adequate safety devices were provided and whether the plaintiff refused to use them, or if the plank itself was unauthorized and its use prohibited.

Labor LawWorkplace SafetySummary JudgmentRecalcitrant WorkerFall from HeightSubcontractor LiabilityGeneral Contractor LiabilityOwner LiabilityIndemnificationContribution
References
2
Case No. ADJ7469391
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

DANIEL DIAZ NEGRON vs. CLEAR WATER HANDWASH dba MARINA CLASSIC CAR WASH, STATE FARM

This case involves a lien claimant, Best of California Business Promotions, whose petition for reconsideration was dismissed because it was based on an assumed dismissal of their lien that had not actually occurred. The lien claimant failed to appear at a scheduled lien trial and did not provide good cause for their absence. Furthermore, the Appeals Board is issuing a notice of intention to impose sanctions up to $1,000 against the lien claimant and its representatives for filing a frivolous petition and wasting judicial resources by arguing an issue not supported by the record. The Board is also removing the case on its own motion.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder of RemovalSanctionsLabor Code 5813Lien ClaimantNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienNon-Appearance at TrialLien Activation FeeUnconstitutional
References
1
Case No. ADJ4141215 (MON 0288595) ADJ4160601 (MON 0288596) ADJ2249717 (MON 0300098)
Regular
Dec 27, 2011

DOREEN LABOY vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, Legally Uninsured; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND / STATE CONTRACT SERVICES, Adjusting Agency

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, finding their argument regarding AMA Guidelines irrelevant due to a prior stipulation to the 1997 Rating Schedule. The WCAB granted removal to issue notices of intention to impose sanctions and award attorney's fees/costs against the defendant and their counsel. This action is based on the defendant's frivolous and bad-faith tactics in raising an issue for the first time on reconsideration that was not previously litigated or argued. The defendant's petition is deemed without merit and solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.

LABOYDOREENSTATE OF CALIFORNIADEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTHSTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDJOINT FINDINGS AND AWARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONREMOVALNOTICES OF INTENTIONORDER TO PAY EXPENSES
References
6
Case No. WCK 0031401, WCK 0031404, WCK 0057363, WCK 0062663
Regular
Mar 11, 2008

Sally Sterns vs. SAFEWAY, INC., VENTURI STAFFING PARTNERS, INCJABAR STAFFING AGENCY, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

This case concerns an applicant's request for reconsideration of a prior decision that deferred her permanent disability award pending Supreme Court rulings on apportionment and the *Wilkinson* doctrine. The Appeals Board, having reviewed the matter, now returns it to the trial level. The WCJ is instructed to issue a new final decision on all outstanding issues, given the intervening Supreme Court and Appeals Board decisions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSally SternsSafeway Inc.Venturi Staffing PartnersSpecialty Risk ServicesOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationpermanent disabilityapportionmentBrodieWelcher
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 8,868 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