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. ADJ14263093
Regular
Apr 12, 2023

CECILIA OJEDA vs. AMY'S KITCHEN, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer: The applicant claimed cumulative injury to her neck, bilateral wrists, shoulders, and upper extremities, which the employer initially denied for all body parts except the neck. The WCJ found injury to all claimed body parts, relying on treating physicians' reports, and found the QME's reports unsubstantial due to inconsistencies and admissions of uncertainty during deposition. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the QME's opinion was substantial evidence regarding injured body parts and permanent disability. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that the QME's testimony was too speculative and contradictory to constitute substantial evidence for the disputed body parts.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardOrthopedic Qualified Medical Examiner (QME)Substantial EvidenceCumulative InjuryBilateral WristsBilateral ShouldersBilateral Upper ExtremitiesCervical Radiculopathy
References
3
Case No. 13-71700
Regular Panel Decision

Board of Trustees v. Kern (In re Kern)

The Plaintiffs, the Board of Trustees of benefit funds under ERISA, sought to declare debts owed by Defendant Richard Kern, principal owner of Cool Sheetmetal, Inc. (CSI), non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. The core issue was whether monies deducted from employee paychecks but not remitted to the benefit funds constituted non-dischargeable debts under § 523(a)(4) and (6) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Court ruled that monies deducted for a vacation fund are non-dischargeable because they were subject to a statutory trust, Kern acted as a fiduciary, and committed defalcation. However, deductions for union assessments and political action league (PAL) funds were deemed dischargeable, as no statutory trust was established for these. Furthermore, the Plaintiffs' claim under § 523(a)(6) for willful and malicious injury was dismissed. The Court granted summary judgment in part for Plaintiffs regarding the Vacation Fund deductions, with the exact amount to be determined at trial, and granted summary judgment in part for Defendant on the other claims.

BankruptcyNon-dischargeabilityERISAFiduciary DutyDefalcationSummary JudgmentEmployee ContributionsVacation FundUnion AssessmentsPolitical Action League (PAL)
References
10
Case No. ADJ10771579
Regular
Aug 08, 2018

Gabriel Ruano vs. Mayekawa USA, SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, BROADSPIRE

This case involved a worker claiming industrial injury to multiple body parts. The Appeals Board granted the employer's petition for reconsideration to correct the Findings of Fact. The Board amended the Findings to accurately reflect all injured body parts, including the psyche, and removed an incorrectly listed body part. Ultimately, the Board affirmed the original decision with these specified amendments.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Factsubstantial evidencemedical reportsprimary treating physicianBal S. Grewal Ph.D.Report and Recommendationinjured body partspsychecervical spine
References
0
Case No. ADJ9312928
Regular
Sep 11, 2019

Jeffrey DaVanon vs. Oakland Athletics, ACE Insurance Company, Sedgwick Claims Management

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The applicant, a former professional athlete, claimed cumulative trauma injury to multiple body parts, including gastrointestinal issues, neurological problems, and a sleep disorder not initially identified. The Board found that the WCJ erred by excluding medical evidence for these later-identified body parts, as they were included in the parties' stipulations and could have arisen or worsened after the applicant's deposition. The case is returned for further proceedings, allowing admission of relevant medical records and deferring final decisions on disputed body parts and permanent disability.

Mandatory Settlement ConferencePetition for ReconsiderationCumulative TraumaProfessional AthleteStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5405Labor Code Section 5412Discovery CloseBifurcationIndependent Medical Evaluator
References
6
Case No. ADJ7288330
Regular
Oct 03, 2016

GLORIA BENITEZ vs. NEWPORT SUBACUTE HEALTH CARE CENTER, ALASKA NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant, Gloria Benitez, sought to reopen her workers' compensation claim to include injury to additional body parts beyond her cervical spine and psyche. The original award found injury only to the cervical spine and psyche, with a 19% permanent disability rating for the cervical spine. While the WCJ's initial decision denied injury to additional body parts, the Board granted reconsideration. The Board amended the original findings to defer the issue of injury to the alleged additional body parts, while affirming other aspects of the WCJ's order, including the appointment of a regular physician to evaluate new and further disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderNew and Further DisabilityAgreed Medical ExaminerRegular PhysicianLabor Code Section 5410Petition to ReopenIndustrial InjuryCervical Spine
References
4
Case No. ADJ18492736
Regular
Sep 30, 2025

MARIA HERNANDEZ vs. VALLARTA FOOD ENTERPRISES, INC.; SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed a petition for reconsideration filed by Safety National Insurance, challenging a WCJ's finding that Maria Hernandez sustained injury to multiple body parts. The Board found the treating physician's report lacked substantial medical evidence due to inadequate records and a flawed job description. Additionally, the Qualified Medical Evaluator's (QME) reports were incomplete and inconsistent regarding all body parts except the left hand. Consequently, the Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original decision, and substituted new findings, determining that Hernandez sustained a cumulative injury only to her left hand while deferring the issue of injury to other body parts for further development of the record.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Ordersubstantial medical evidenceQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)cumulative traumabilateral shoulderswristshandsleft hand injury
References
19
Case No. ADJ9767947
Regular
Jan 18, 2017

GILBERT PEREZ vs. ABC SHEET METAL, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

This case involves an applicant who sustained industrial injury to his left knee and abdomen. The trial judge initially found injury to these parts but also found no injury to back, psyche, lower extremities, and stress, which the applicant appealed. The appellate court annulled the denial of reconsideration, finding the trial judge improperly ruled on body parts not fully at issue. The Appeals Board rescinded the negative finding, deferred the issue of additional injured body parts, and remanded for further proceedings to determine if injury to other parts occurred.

WCABindustrial injurywelderleft kneeabdomenbackpsychelower extremitiesstressCourt of Appeal
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 2017

Philpott v. New York

Plaintiff Jeffery Philpott, a former Vice President at SUNY’s College of Optometry, filed an employment discrimination lawsuit alleging sexual orientation discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation. Initially, the State of New York and the University of the State of New York were named as defendants but were later dismissed, as was a claim under the ADA, leaving only State University of New York (SUNY) as a defendant. The court evaluated whether sexual orientation discrimination is cognizable under Title VII, finding that it is due to the evolving legal landscape and recent circuit court decisions. It concluded that plaintiff plausibly alleged his claims and that they were not time-barred. However, the court dismissed the Title IX claim, determining that Title VII is the exclusive remedy for employment discrimination in federally funded educational institutions. Consequently, the defendants' motion to dismiss was granted in part and denied in part.

Sexual Orientation DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationTitle VIITitle IXMotion to DismissGender StereotypingStatute of LimitationsEmployment DiscriminationFederal Court
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 18, 2015

Doe v. Hagenbeck

Plaintiff Jane Doe, a former cadet, sued West Point officials and the U.S. for alleged sexual hostility and discrimination at the academy, which she claims forced her to resign. She alleged violations of her Fifth Amendment Due Process and Equal Protection rights, as well as breach of contract and Federal Tort Claims Act claims. The court, presided over by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to dismiss. While dismissing Doe's due process, FTCA, and contract claims, and dismissing the U.S. from the case, the court allowed her equal protection claim against the individual defendants, Hagenbeck and Rapp, to proceed. The court reasoned that Doe sufficiently alleged rampant gender discrimination at West Point, which violated her constitutional right to equal protection, and that the Feres doctrine did not bar this specific claim.

Gender DiscriminationSexual HarassmentEqual ProtectionDue ProcessWest PointMilitary AcademyMotion to DismissBivens ClaimFederal Tort Claims ActLittle Tucker Act
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hargett v. Metropolitan Transit Authority

David T. Hargett sued the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA), its executives (Stanley Grill, David Ross, May Mcintosh), the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), and its employees (Ken Neal, James Harding, Jr.) for wrongful discharge based on civil rights violations, age discrimination, New York State Human Rights Law, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), and breach of contract. Hargett, an African American male, was terminated from NYCTA in June 2004 after a female subordinate accused him of sending inappropriate emails, an accusation she later recanted claiming she was pressured by NYCTA management. The court, presided by Judge McMahon, granted in part and denied in part the NYCTA Defendants' motion to dismiss, specifically dismissing IIED, defamation, and breach of contract claims as time-barred or lacking legal merit. The MTA Defendants' motion to dismiss all claims was granted, as the MTA was not considered Hargett's employer and individual liability requirements were not met. The NYCTA Defendants' motion to strike certain paragraphs from the complaint was denied.

Wrongful TerminationAge Discrimination in Employment ActCivil Rights ViolationRacial DiscriminationIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressDefamation LawsuitBreach of Employment ContractMotion to DismissStatute of LimitationsEmployment Discrimination
References
54
Showing 1-10 of 2,262 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