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. ADJ6853853
Regular
Oct 05, 2012

KYB FUGFUGOSH vs. SAN QUENTIN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a finding that San Quentin State Prison committed serious and willful misconduct. The applicant, an inmate kitchen worker, sustained a right shoulder injury on June 18, 2008, after being ordered to work despite presenting medical documentation of his injury and post-surgical condition. The Board upheld the Administrative Law Judge's finding that prison officials' failure to acknowledge and act on the applicant's medical limitations constituted a reckless disregard for his safety, proximately causing his injury. The employer's arguments regarding perjured testimony and newly discovered evidence were rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSan Quentin State PrisonState Compensation Insurance Fundserious and willful misconductadmitted injurykitchen workerarthroscopic acromioplastyrotator cuff tearsfailure to reportinmate request for interview
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wilson v. Selsky

The petitioner, a prison inmate, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge three separate determinations that found him guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules during his participation in a work release program. The first determination involved taking unapproved cash loans from a co-worker, supported by bank records and parole officer testimony, despite the petitioner's denials. The second determination concerned altering his work schedule without parole officer approval, substantiated by time sheets and employer testimony. The third determination accused him of unauthorized driving, which was supported by witness testimony. The court confirmed all determinations and dismissed the petition, finding them supported by substantial evidence and rejecting the petitioner's claims of procedural errors, prejudice, and bias.

prison disciplinary ruleswork release programunapproved loansaltered work scheduleunauthorized drivingsubstantial evidencehearsay evidencecredibilityprocedural errorsdue process
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2004

Crowley v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

William Crowley, after pleading guilty to four counts, was sentenced to twenty-nine months incarceration in 2002. The sentencing judge recommended he serve the final eighteen months in a halfway house (Community Confinement Center - CCC), consistent with the Bureau of Prisons' (BOP) longstanding practice. However, in December 2002, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) adopted a new legal interpretation, significantly restricting CCC placements to the final two months of a sentence. Crowley filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging this retroactive application. The court granted Crowley's petition, ruling that the new BOP policy was invalid as it was not promulgated in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act and was based on an incorrect statutory interpretation. Furthermore, the court held that the retroactive application of the new policy to Crowley's sentence violated the Ex Post Facto Clause, as the original sentencing relied on the prior BOP policy.

Habeas CorpusBureau of Prisons PolicyCommunity Confinement CentersAdministrative Procedure ActStatutory InterpretationEx Post Facto ClauseSentencing GuidelinesRetroactive ApplicationJudicial DiscretionPrisoner Rights
References
54
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fahie v. Thornburgh

Plaintiff Realdalist A. Fahie, a former probationary correctional officer at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City, brought a Title VII action against the Federal Bureau of Prisons, alleging discrimination based on race and national origin following his termination in 1984. Fahie claimed that his termination was a pretext for discrimination, citing instances of racial slurs and disparate treatment compared to white employees. The court found that Fahie failed to prove he was performing his work in a satisfactory manner or that non-minority workers were retained while he was terminated. Consequently, the court ruled that the plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case of discrimination, and judgment was entered for the defendant.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VII Civil Rights ActRacial DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationProbationary Employee TerminationPrima Facie CaseBurdenshiftingPretext for DiscriminationCorrectional OfficerFederal Bureau of Prisons
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 23, 2013

Hodges v. Attorney General

Plaintiff Jerry Hodges, a correctional officer, sued his employer, the United States Bureau of Prisons (BOP), for disability discrimination and retaliation under the Rehabilitation Act. He alleged that his temporary modified assignment (TAD) and the denial of his reassignment bids constituted adverse employment actions and created a hostile work environment. The Court granted the BOP's motion for summary judgment on all claims. It found Hodges failed to exhaust administrative remedies for most claims, and did not demonstrate "materially adverse" employment actions for his discrimination and retaliation claims. Furthermore, the Court rejected the hostile work environment claim, concluding it was improperly raised and that the alleged incidents were not severe or pervasive enough to create an abusive environment.

Disability DiscriminationRetaliationRehabilitation ActSummary JudgmentAdverse Employment ActionHostile Work EnvironmentAdministrative ExhaustionEEO ComplaintTemporary Modified AssignmentMedical Restrictions
References
46
Case No. ADJ11428234
Regular
Oct 17, 2025

RAMON COLLADO vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CENTINELA STATE PRISON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to study the factual and legal issues in Ramon Collado's case against the California Department of Corrections and Centinela State Prison. Collado sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings and Order from July 28, 2021, which concluded he failed to prove an industrially caused heart/hypertension injury between December 20, 2012, and August 14, 2018. The Board found the Qualified Medical Evaluator's opinion on whether Collado's condition was an aggravation or mere exacerbation of prior injuries was unclear and contradictory, failing to constitute substantial medical evidence. Consequently, the Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings, including the development of the medical record and a determination on the applicability of Labor Code section 3212 presumptions.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRamon ColladoCalifornia Department of CorrectionsCentinela State PrisonState Compensation Insurance FundOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationFindings and Orderworkers' compensation administrative law judgeindustrially caused injuryexacerbation
References
28
Case No. ADJ7130626 ADJ7130710
Regular
Mar 07, 2013

MARK CABRERA vs. CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON KINGS COUNTY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Mark Cabrera against the California State Prison Kings County. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration of the WCJ's decision. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the WCJ's report, giving great weight to the judge's credibility findings. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia State Prison Kings CountyState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJ ReportGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Credibility FindingDenied Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. ADJ11500341
Regular
May 06, 2025

David Evans vs. Chuckawalla Valley State Prison, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Applicant David Evans sustained an industrial injury to his circulatory system while employed at Chuckawalla Valley State Prison. The case in chief was resolved by a Stipulated Award. Lien claimant California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) Benefit Trust Fund sought reconsideration of a Findings and Order (F&O) that disallowed its lien for living expenses due to time limitations. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration but ultimately found that CCPOA failed to properly notify the defendant of its lien before benefits were paid, thus the defendant is not liable, and CCPOA takes nothing on its lien.

California Workers' CompensationLabor Code section 4903.5Labor Code section 4903.1(a)(3)(A)Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationStipulated AwardTemporary DisabilityIndustrial InjuryCirculatory SystemCorrectional Officer
References
0
Case No. ADJ13254756
Regular
Aug 05, 2025

MARK EVANS vs. CORCORAN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE EMPLOYEES

Applicant Mark Evans sustained injuries during employment at Corcoran State Prison, leading to a WCJ order for medical treatment. Defendant petitioned for reconsideration, arguing the Utilization Review (UR) decision denying the treatment was timely and challenging the WCAB's jurisdiction over the medical necessity dispute. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration, classifying the WCJ's order as a final threshold order. The Board deferred a final decision, ordering further review of the merits and the entire record.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationUtilization ReviewTimelinessRequest for AuthorizationDubon IIFinal OrderThreshold IssueLabor Code Section 4610Medical Treatment
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2007

Kha'Sun Creator Allah v. Leclaire

The petitioner appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Franklin County, which dismissed his CPLR article 78 application. This proceeding challenged a prison disciplinary determination where the petitioner was found guilty of refusing orders, making threats, damaging state property, and obstructing cell visibility. Petitioner argued he was improperly denied a social worker's testimony regarding his mental health. However, a Hearing Officer had already conducted a confidential interview with an Office of Mental Health psychologist, deeming the requested testimony redundant. Ultimately, the judgment dismissing the petition was affirmed.

prison disciplinary rulesCPLR article 78witness denialmental health statushearing officerprocedural challengesredundancyappealSupreme CourtFranklin County
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 176 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