Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ1775896 (RDG 0101688), ADJ2010679 (RDG 0104042)

Regular

Nov 28, 2012

RICHARD SEILER vs. CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant, Richard Seiler, petitioned to recuse the judge, alleging prejudice and improper rulings on evidence and medical treatment requests. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the applicant's filings and the judge's report. The WCAB denied the disqualification petition, finding no evidence of bias. The applicant will have the opportunity to raise these issues at trial and, if necessary, file a petition for reconsideration.

Recusal petitionJudge JonesLabor Code section 5311WCAB Rule 10452Chiropractic QMEExclusion of evidencePrescribing physicianHormone replacementMandatory settlement conferencePetition for reconsideration

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Thielmann v. MF Global Holdings Ltd. (In re MF Global Holdings Ltd.)

This case involves motions to dismiss an amended class action complaint filed by former employees (Plaintiffs) against James W. Giddens, as SIPA Trustee for MF Global Inc., and Louis J. Freeh, as Chapter 11 Trustee for MF Global Holdings Ltd., MF Global Finance USA, Inc., and MF Global Holdings USA, Inc. The Plaintiffs allege violations of the federal WARN Act and the New York WARN Act due to employment termination without sufficient notice. The Court granted the SIPA Trustee's motion to dismiss with prejudice, finding the "liquidating fiduciary" principle applicable to MFGI as its statutory purpose was liquidation. However, the Chapter 11 Trustee's motion to dismiss was granted without prejudice and with leave to amend, as the factual record did not conclusively establish that the Chapter 11 Debtors were solely liquidating at the time of layoffs, and the complaint was otherwise deficient. Claims for vacation pay and unpaid wages were dismissed without prejudice to be handled in the claims allowance process.

WARN ActNew York WARN ActClass ActionMass LayoffsPlant ClosingsBankruptcy ProceedingsCorporate LiquidationChapter 11 ReorganizationSIPA TrusteeLiquidating Fiduciary Principle

References

Case No. ADJ8643967, ADJ10070125, ADJ10069887, ADJ10525090

Regular

Sep 28, 2018

Applicant vs. Calgary Flames, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied an applicant's petition for removal of a prior order granting a continuance. The applicant, a hockey player alleging industrial injuries, claimed the continuance would cause significant prejudice and irreparable harm. However, the Board found that the applicant's attorney had filed a petition to withdraw, making the continuance necessary for the applicant to secure new counsel. Therefore, removal was deemed inappropriate and the petition was denied.

ADJ8643967ADJ10070125ADJ10069887ADJ10525090Santa Ana District OfficeCALGARY FLAMESOPINION AND ORDERDENYING PETITION FOR REMOVALworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJ

References

Case No. ADJ982471 (LAO 0859620)

Regular

Apr 28, 2014

JUVENCIO TORRES-RAMOS vs. FELIX MARQUEZ, REDWOOD FREE INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal and dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that the defendant failed to show significant prejudice or irreparable harm to warrant removal. The applicant voluntarily withdrew their reconsideration petition after understanding that their pain management treatment request lacked the required authorization form. The case was referred to the Independent Medical Review (IMR) process for a decision on the applicant's need for pain management treatment.

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationIndependent Medical ReviewIMRsubstantial evidenceutilization reviewtimelyprimary treating physicianDWC Form PR-2

References

Case No. ADJ2829880 (VNO 0460797)

Regular

Feb 01, 2010

, Applicant, LEW RORICK, vs. PREFERRED PLUMBING, INC.; PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY,

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration as it was not filed against a final order, which is a prerequisite for reconsideration under Labor Code Section 5900. Additionally, the Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm required for such an extraordinary remedy. The applicant's request to take the claim off calendar was based on a newly discovered heart attack potentially related to industrial hypertension, but the Board found these arguments insufficient to justify removal. Therefore, both the dismissal of reconsideration and the denial of removal stand.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOff CalendarIndustrial HypertensionHeart AttackMedical EvidenceCausationNew InjuryAdministrative Law Judge

References

Case No. ADJ10663212

Regular

Dec 18, 2017

Applicant vs. Sedgwick CMS, Sedgwick CMS

This case concerns a Petition for Removal filed by an applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCAB also determined that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy should an adverse final decision be issued. Therefore, the Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied removal as an extraordinary remedy.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyWCJ ReportAdopt and IncorporateDenial of RemovalAppeals Board

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Wilson v. Westmoreland Farm, Inc.

The court denied an application by defendant Westmoreland Farm, Inc. to initiate a third-party action against Margaret K. Wilson, the infant plaintiff's natural mother and guardian, for negligent supervision. The infant plaintiff sustained severe facial injuries from a horse owned by other defendants on WMF property. The court ruled that New York common law does not recognize a cause of action for negligent parental supervision unless affirmative negligent conduct is pleaded with specificity. WMF's proposed pleading was deemed insufficient due to vague and generalized allegations. The court also noted a lack of corporate authorization for the third-party action but confirmed subject matter jurisdiction, denying the application without prejudice. Additionally, the plaintiff's request for a discovery extension was denied.

Negligent SupervisionParental LiabilityThird-Party PleadingFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 14Diversity JurisdictionAncillary JurisdictionCorporate AuthorityMotion to AmendDiscovery ScheduleNew York Law

References

Case No. ADJ1358822

Regular

Aug 26, 2008

FRANCISCO RAMIREZ vs. TANIMURA & ANTLE, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY, Administered By CNA CLAIMS PLUS, BENDT & VALENTINE, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB dismissed defendant Zenith's petition for removal (moot as the WCJ issued a decision), dismissed applicant's petition for reconsideration (interlocutory order), and denied applicant's petition for removal (no significant prejudice). The case was returned to trial level for further proceedings.

Valley FeverAgreed Medical ExaminerPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationAOE/COELabor Code section 4628substantial evidenceinterlocutory procedural ordersdiscretionary remedysignificant prejudice

References

Case No. ADJ7712702

Regular

Jul 22, 2013

MICHAEL BOOKER vs. ATLANTA FALCONS, TENNESSEE TITANS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to review an administrative law judge's dismissal of the Tennessee Titans and their insurer, Travelers, with prejudice. The WCAB rescinded the dismissal order, finding that dismissal with prejudice may improperly bar future indemnity claims between employers and potentially conflict with the applicant's right to join necessary parties. Furthermore, dismissing Travelers with prejudice could negatively impact the applicant. The case is returned for further proceedings to ensure the applicant's entitlement to benefits is determined first.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationOrder of Dismissal With PrejudiceRetraxitIndemnity RightsCross-complaintSupplemental ProceedingsLabor Code Section 5500.5(b)Joining PartiesManzano v. Flavurence Corp.

References

Case No. ADJ9090412

Regular

Nov 21, 2014

, Applicant, , ABDUR SIKDER vs. , Defendants. LUXOR CAB COMPANY INC.; GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the judge's decision for a replacement QME panel. The defendant argued the applicant waived his right to a new panel by not objecting during the examination with Dr. Carpenter. The majority found that removal was not warranted as the defendant did not demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Commissioner Lowe dissented, arguing the applicant waived his right to object under the relevant rules by failing to do so during the examination.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelChiropracticLabor Code Section 4062.1WCJAdministrative Law JudgeGood CauseUnrepresented EmployeeTimeliness of Objection

References

Showing 1-10 of 14,662 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ1775896 (RDG 0101688), ADJ2010679 (RDG 0104042)

Regular

Nov 28, 2012

RICHARD SEILER vs. CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Thielmann v. MF Global Holdings Ltd. (In re MF Global Holdings Ltd.)

WARN ActNew York WARN ActClass ActionMass LayoffsPlant ClosingsBankruptcy ProceedingsCorporate LiquidationChapter 11 ReorganizationSIPA TrusteeLiquidating Fiduciary Principle

References

Case No. ADJ8643967, ADJ10070125, ADJ10069887, ADJ10525090

Regular

Sep 28, 2018

Applicant vs. Calgary Flames, et al.

ADJ8643967ADJ10070125ADJ10069887ADJ10525090Santa Ana District OfficeCALGARY FLAMESOPINION AND ORDERDENYING PETITION FOR REMOVALworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJ

References

Case No. ADJ982471 (LAO 0859620)

Regular

Apr 28, 2014

JUVENCIO TORRES-RAMOS vs. FELIX MARQUEZ, REDWOOD FREE INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationIndependent Medical ReviewIMRsubstantial evidenceutilization reviewtimelyprimary treating physicianDWC Form PR-2

References

Case No. ADJ2829880 (VNO 0460797)

Regular

Feb 01, 2010

, Applicant, LEW RORICK, vs. PREFERRED PLUMBING, INC.; PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY,

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOff CalendarIndustrial HypertensionHeart AttackMedical EvidenceCausationNew InjuryAdministrative Law Judge

References

Case No. ADJ10663212

Regular

Dec 18, 2017

Applicant vs. Sedgwick CMS, Sedgwick CMS

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdequate RemedyWCJ ReportAdopt and IncorporateDenial of RemovalAppeals Board

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Wilson v. Westmoreland Farm, Inc.

References

Case No. ADJ1358822

Regular

Aug 26, 2008

FRANCISCO RAMIREZ vs. TANIMURA & ANTLE, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY, Administered By CNA CLAIMS PLUS, BENDT & VALENTINE, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

References

Case No. ADJ7712702

Regular

Jul 22, 2013

MICHAEL BOOKER vs. ATLANTA FALCONS, TENNESSEE TITANS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY

References

Case No. ADJ9090412

Regular

Nov 21, 2014

, Applicant, , ABDUR SIKDER vs. , Defendants. LUXOR CAB COMPANY INC.; GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelChiropracticLabor Code Section 4062.1WCJAdministrative Law JudgeGood CauseUnrepresented EmployeeTimeliness of Objection

References

Showing 1-10 of 14,662 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.