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. ADJ4192266 (VNO 0544329)
Regular
Mar 07, 2011

JOHN HENRY vs. CITY OF SANTA MONICA, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves a police officer's workers' compensation claim for multiple injuries. The applicant was awarded 85% permanent disability and an additional 15% increase due to the employer's failure to offer suitable work within 60 days of the applicant reaching permanent and stationary status. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing it had offered work and that the applicant's post-injury earnings rebutted the diminished future earning capacity (DFEC) presumption. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found the employer's work offer was invalid because the applicant had not reached permanent and stationary status for all his injuries at the time of the offer. Furthermore, the defendant failed to adequately rebut the DFEC presumption by not presenting comprehensive evidence regarding earning capacity beyond just post-injury earnings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilitySection 4658(d)Diminished Future Earning CapacityDFECQualified Medical EvaluatorQMEAgreed Medical Examiner
References
4
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 01347
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 04, 2021

Treacy v. Inspired Event Productions, LLC

Peter Treacy, a Teamsters' Union laborer, was injured on a loading dock when a crate fell on him while unloading materials for an event. He subsequently filed claims against multiple defendants under Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6). The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissing Treacy's claims. On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the lower court's decision, ruling that Treacy was not a covered worker under the Labor Law as his duties were limited to unloading materials on a permanent loading dock and he was not involved in the actual construction being performed at the site.

Worker injuryloading docksummary judgmentLabor Law § 240Labor Law § 241(6)construction workerscope of employmentappellate reviewTeamsters' Unionpremises liability
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hansen v. Post

The petitioner, a child protective worker, sought custody of Christopher Post, whose parents, Rose and William Post, had a documented history of child abuse and neglect, leading to the removal of seven other children from their care. Christopher had also been involved in two prior neglect proceedings. The parents exhibited severe deficiencies in parenting skills, an inability to address Christopher's emotional disturbances, and a history of rejecting assistance. After voluntarily placing Christopher with the petitioner, who became his psychological parent, they abruptly cut off contact. The Family Court found extraordinary circumstances, justified judicial intervention, and granted custody to the petitioner, a decision which the appellate court subsequently affirmed.

Custody DisputeParental UnfitnessChild NeglectExtraordinary CircumstancesFamily Court Act Article 6Child Protective ServicesAppealParental RightsPsychological ParentEmotional Disturbance
References
5
Case No. ADJ2148955 (LAO 0809167) ADJ4462493 (LAO 0809166)
Regular
Sep 08, 2011

MARLENE CHAN vs. MARINER POST ACUTE NETWORK, INGLEWOOD HEALTH CARE CENTER, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, CHARTIS INC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded a previous award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found that the finding of 100% permanent disability for the applicant's psychiatric injury was not supported by substantial medical evidence because the appointed physician found her to be temporarily, not permanently, disabled. As the applicant's psychiatric condition was not deemed permanent and stationary, assessing the extent of permanent disability was premature. The matter was remanded for further evaluation by the physician and new proceedings at the trial level.

Permanent disabilityPsychiatric disabilityCumulative traumaSpecific injuryCourt-appointed physicianSubstantial medical evidencePermanent and stationary statusReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardRescinded
References
1
Case No. ADJ2318379
Regular
Apr 06, 2010

KATHY ARCHIE vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant, Los Angeles Unified School District, sought reconsideration of an award finding applicant Kathy Archie sustained a 38 percent permanent psychiatric disability due to an industrial injury. The defendant argued the administrative law judge erred by failing to apportion 40 percent of the disability to post-injury events. However, the Appeals Board affirmed the original decision, finding the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof. The Board concluded that the medical evidence, while addressing post-injury events, indicated they were a direct outgrowth of and related to the original industrial injury, thus not constituting a separate causal factor for apportionment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardPayroll TechnicianIndustrial InjuryPsychePermanent DisabilityApportionmentCausationLabor Code Section 4663
References
2
Case No. ADJ3255403 (SDO 0310451) ADJ1056369 (SDO 0343450)
Regular
Feb 04, 2010

PERNELL PRYTHERCH vs. SEA WORLD, INC., PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE, ACE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant who sustained two industrial injuries in 1992 and 1994, resulting in back, psyche, elbow, and upper extremity impairments. The original award found $25\%$ and $75\%$ permanent disability, respectively, with a May 18, 2006 permanent and stationary date. The defendant sought reconsideration, primarily contesting the attorney's fee calculation and the permanent and stationary date. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify the attorney's fee, ordering it to be commuted from the end of the permanent disability award in each case. The rest of the original award, including the permanent and stationary date, was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPernell PrytherchSea World Inc.Pacific Employers InsuranceACE Property and Casualty Insurance Companypermanent disabilityindustrial injurypsycheleft elbowupper extremities
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Joyner v. Event Design Associates, Inc.

Claimant was retained by Event Design Associates, Inc. (EDA) to transport furniture and event props for a party. While en route to a hotel during this assignment, claimant was involved in an automobile accident and sustained serious injuries. Subsequently, claimant applied for workers' compensation benefits, asserting an employer-employee relationship with EDA. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled in favor of the claimant, finding that an employment relationship existed. EDA appealed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's ruling, concluding there was substantial evidence to support the finding of an employer-employee relationship, based on factors such as EDA's control over the work, method of payment, and right to terminate.

Workers' CompensationEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent ContractorSubstantial EvidenceControl TestAppellate ReviewAutomobile AccidentNew YorkWorkers' Compensation BoardTemporary Employment
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nautilus Insurance v. Matthew David Events, Ltd.

Nautilus Insurance Company sought a declaration that it was not obligated to defend or indemnify Matthew David Events (MDE) in a personal injury action brought by Timothy Shea. Shea, an employee of a subcontractor hired by MDE, was injured while working at an event planned by MDE. Nautilus disclaimed coverage due to MDE's failure to provide timely notice and an employee exclusion in the policy. The motion court denied Nautilus's summary judgment, finding the employee exclusion ambiguous. The appellate court reversed, holding that the employee exclusion, which broadly defined 'employee' to include those 'contracted for' the insured, clearly applied to Shea, an employee of MDE's subcontractor. The court concluded that Nautilus had met its burden in demonstrating the exclusion's applicability.

Insurance Coverage DisputeDeclaratory Judgment ActionEmployee Exclusion ClauseContract InterpretationSubcontractor Employee InjuryTimely Notice ProvisionSummary Judgment ReversalAppellate Court DecisionCommercial General Liability PolicyBodily Injury Claim
References
21
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 05367 [174 AD3d 1017]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 2019

Matter of City of Plattsburgh (Plattsburgh Permanent Firemen's Assn.)

The City of Plattsburgh, the appellant, appealed an order from the Supreme Court that denied its application to permanently stay arbitration with the Plattsburgh Permanent Firemen's Association. The dispute originated from a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) which stipulated a minimum staffing level of 36 firefighters and prohibited layoffs. When a firefighter retired, reducing the staff to 35, the City refused to fill the vacancy, citing financial reasons, leading the Firemen's Association to demand arbitration. The Supreme Court denied the City's application to stay arbitration and granted the Association's motion to compel. The Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that the disputed CBA provision was a job security clause. The court found that this clause did not explicitly demonstrate the City's intent to waive its right to reduce staffing for budgetary or economic reasons, thus violating public policy and rendering the dispute non-arbitrable. A concurring opinion further noted that the clause also violated public policy due to its unreasonable duration.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementJob Security ClausePublic PolicyStaffing LevelsFirefighters UnionBudgetary ConstraintsAppellate DivisionCPLR Article 75Stay Arbitration
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Phillips v. Elmira City School District

The Workers' Compensation Board's decision, finding the claimant to have a permanent partial disability and awarding compensation for lost wages after retirement, was affirmed on appeal. The claimant, a school custodian, suffered multiple injuries from a fall, leading to his classification as permanently partially disabled. The causal relationship between the accident and the disability inferred that his post-retirement wage loss was due to physical limitations. The employer failed to prove that the loss of employment was solely due to unrelated economic or other causes.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityLost WagesRetirement BenefitsCausally Related DisabilityAppellate DecisionAffirmed DecisionEmployer AppealMedical CausationEconomic Factors
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 5,312 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