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
Sep 27, 2018

Saint-Jean v. Emigrant Mortg. Co.

This case involves a lawsuit by eight Black property owners against Emigrant Mortgage Company and Emigrant Bank, alleging predatory "STAR NINA" loans that targeted minority communities. Plaintiffs claimed these loans were designed to strip home equity by imposing an onerous 18% interest rate upon late payment, a calculated plan given the borrowers' low credit scores and lack of sophistication. A jury found Emigrant liable for violating the Fair Housing Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and New York City Human Rights Law, awarding compensatory damages. Following the verdict, both parties filed post-trial motions. The court granted in part and denied in part both defendants' and plaintiffs' motions, notably finding the Saintils' waiver unenforceable due to public policy and ordering a new trial on damages for all plaintiffs, citing inconsistencies and lack of clarity in the original awards.

Predatory LendingSubprime MortgagesRacial DiscriminationFair Housing ActEqual Credit Opportunity ActNew York City Human Rights LawJury VerdictPost-Trial MotionsDamagesNew Trial
References
46
Case No. ADJ16491268; ADJ15884384; ADJ16161110; ADJ16161057; ADJ16161093; ADJ15760386; ADJ18891808; ADJ19153721; ADJ16116250
Significant

Steve Hoddinott, et al. vs. Bravo Security Services, Inc.; National Liability Fire Ins. Co., administered by Biberk Business Insurance, et al.

The Appeals Board issued a notice to set a status conference to assist the parties in further discussing their stipulations with a designated hearing officer.

En BancRemovalStipulationSupplemental BriefingStatus ConferenceHearing OfficerDeputy CommissionerAppeals BoardAdjudication NumbersBravo Security Services
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kaczor v. City of Buffalo

Walter Kaczor, a retired Buffalo Police Officer, sued the City of Buffalo and its officers for age discrimination under the ADEA and New York State Human Rights Law, alleging he was not reinstated due to his age. A jury found the defendants willfully discriminated against Kaczor. Defendants filed post-trial motions challenging the sufficiency of evidence, jurisdictional issues, and damages computation. The court denied defendants' motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on liability and willfulness, finding ample evidence to support the jury's findings, including direct evidence of age discrimination. The court also denied motions to dismiss Kaczor's ADEA and pendent state law claims, confirming jurisdiction despite complex interplays between federal and state filing requirements. Issues related to the excessiveness of damages were referred to a Magistrate for settlement negotiations.

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)New York State Human Rights LawPost-Trial MotionsWillful DiscriminationJudgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (JNOV)Procedural RequirementsJurisdictional IssuesElection of RemediesDamagesEmotional Distress
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thompson v. Roland (In Re Roland)

This post-trial decision concerns an adversary proceeding initiated by the plaintiff, Marjorie Thompson, Esq., against her former husband, the debtor, in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. The plaintiff sought to declare the debtor's obligation to pay her attorney's fees non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) or (a)(15). These fees stemmed from state court litigation where the plaintiff compelled the debtor to cooperate in the sale of a jointly owned property, and from the current bankruptcy proceedings. The court analyzed whether an enforceable right to attorney's fees existed under the parties' separation agreement's indemnification clause. It concluded that the indemnification provisions did not cover the specific breach committed by the debtor, thus failing to establish a contractual right to attorney's fees. As a result, the court ruled there was no "debt" to be deemed non-dischargeable and dismissed the adversary proceeding on its merits.

Bankruptcy LawNon-Dischargeability of DebtAttorney's FeesSeparation AgreementIndemnification ClauseContract InterpretationRooker-Feldman DoctrineStipulation of LawChapter 7Adversary Proceeding
References
25
Case No. ADJ4639631 (MON 0327478)
Regular
Nov 08, 2012

MARY JONES vs. UCLA MEDICAL CENTER, SEDGWICK, CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding that the judge improperly continued the case to trial after a status conference without defendant's agreement. The Board rescinded the judge's order, stating that a mandatory settlement conference (MSC) is required after a status conference unless parties agree otherwise. The case is returned for further proceedings, including setting a new MSC, with discovery remaining open to allow the defendant to complete its investigation.

Petition for RemovalWCJStatus ConferenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscoveryOff CalendarLabor Code Section 5502(e)(3)WCAB Rule 10301(dd)Pretrial Conference StatementDeclarations of Readiness to Proceed
References
2
Case No. ADJ1906750 (OAK 0339121) ADJ7499032
Regular
Aug 15, 2013

MARY FISHER vs. MET LIFE INSURANCE, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Removal to rescind the WCJ's order closing discovery and continuing the case to trial. The WCJ erred by converting a status conference into a mandatory settlement conference without adequate notice to the applicant, thereby unfairly precluding her from obtaining a required vocational expert report. Since the applicant did not expect discovery to close at the initial status conference, the Appeals Board returned the matter for a proper MSC and further proceedings.

Petition for RemovalVocational expert reportMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery closureIndustrial injuryLabor Code section 5502(d)(3)Grupe Company v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Labor Code section 5703(j)Due diligenceStatus conference
References
1
Case No. ADJ8150716
Regular
Apr 29, 2013

CHRIS ARCE vs. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order setting trial was interlocutory, not final. The WCAB granted removal of the order, finding applicant was denied due process by lack of notice for a status conference. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the order setting trial and substituted an order converting the trial date to a mandatory settlement conference. This decision aims to address potential prejudice to the applicant and promote judicial economy.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPacific Bell Telephone CompanySedgwick CMSADJ8150716Supplemental Petition for ReconsiderationDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedWCJ OrderThird Party CreditDue ProcessMandatory Settlement Conference
References
11
Case No. ADJ4398425 (LAO 0875977) ADJ1647933 (LAO 0867627)
Regular
Jul 21, 2010

PHYLLIS MOSS vs. PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP, Chubb Services Corporation

This case involves a dispute over a mandatory settlement conference (MSC) where both parties claim the other was absent or improperly handled the proceedings. The Appeals Board granted removal due to conflicting records and confusing circumstances surrounding the MSC and a subsequent trial setting. The Board found the WCJ erred by setting the matter for trial after issuing an order taking it off calendar, despite conflicting accounts of attorney appearances. Consequently, the scheduled trial was converted to a status conference for further proceedings.

Petition for removalMandatory settlement conferenceOrder off calendarMinutes of HearingPre-Trial Conference StatementAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Status conferenceRemandedWCJWCAB
References
0
Case No. ADJ4155359 (OXN 0143340)
Regular
May 23, 2014

LISA SMITH vs. AGOURA WESTLAKE ANIMAL HOSPITAL, FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant Agoura Westlake Animal Hospital sought removal from an order continuing the case to trial on psychiatric injury and sleeplessness, arguing they should have obtained a supplemental QME report first. The Appeals Board denied this petition, agreeing with the WCJ that the psychiatric injury issue was ready for trial as both parties had QME evaluations. The Board found no abuse of discretion in the WCJ treating the hearing as a Mandatory Settlement Conference rather than a status conference. One Commissioner dissented, believing removal should be granted to allow the supplemental QME evaluation due to applicant's refusal to attend and the lack of trial readiness for psychiatric injury.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Injury to PsycheSleeplessnessMandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)Declaration of Readiness to Proceed (DOR)Petition to CompelWCJ (Workers' Compensation Judge)Appeals BoardIndustrial Injury
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zapico v. Bucyrus-Erie Co.

This case addresses post-trial motions concerning the liability of Atlantic Container Lines (ACL), a stevedore, to Bucyrus-Erie Co., a truck-crane manufacturer and third-party plaintiff. The central issue is whether ACL enjoys immunity from contribution or indemnity claims under 33 U.S.C. § 905, following a jury finding that both Bucyrus-Erie's negligent manufacturing and ACL's incompetent employee (Antonio Fuet) equally contributed to the injury of Adolfo Millan and death of Joseph Zapico, ACL's employees. ACL argued it was immune as a compensation-paying stevedore and lacked an indemnity agreement. The court found that Bucyrus-Erie's claim was not 'on account of' the employee injury, but rather for partial indemnification based on ACL's implied warranty of workmanlike performance or a quasi-contractual theory. The court concluded that extending third-party benefits or apportioning damages based on fault would not violate statutory immunity and would be equitable, especially given manufacturers' lack of control over stevedoring functions and increasing strict liability. Therefore, ACL's motion for judgment in its favor was denied, Bucyrus-Erie Co.'s motion to amend its pleadings was granted, and Celia Zapico's motion to strike the jury's finding of contributory negligence was denied.

Stevedore LiabilityMaritime IndemnityLongshoremen's ActThird-Party ClaimsProduct Manufacturer NegligenceEmployee IncompetenceContribution LawWarranty of Workmanlike PerformanceFederal Civil ProcedurePost-Trial Litigation
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 7,473 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