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

Walsh v. Katz

This case addresses a constitutional challenge to a residency requirement for a town justice/town board member position on Fishers Island, Town of Southold, Suffolk County. Petitioners, Fishers Island residents Arthur J. Walsh and Nina J. Schmid, objected to respondent Daniel C. Ross's candidacy because he did not meet the specific residency criteria. The Appellate Division upheld the statute's constitutionality, applying a rational basis test. Ross appealed, advocating for a strict scrutiny standard and arguing that the residency requirement violated equal protection by diluting voter influence. The court affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, concluding that the rational basis test was appropriate given the indirect impact on voting rights, and found a rational basis in ensuring meaningful representation for the geographically unique Fishers Island community.

Constitutional LawElection LawResidency RequirementEqual Protection ClauseRational Basis ReviewStrict ScrutinyTown JusticeTown Board MemberFishers IslandSouthold
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Meringolo v. City of New York

This case involves Corrections Captains, led by Peter Meringolo, suing the City of New York and the New York City Department of Correction for unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The central dispute revolves around whether these employees qualify for the 'bona fide executive' exemption from FLSA overtime requirements, which hinges on satisfying the Department of Labor's 'salary basis test'. The court, presided over by District Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy, determined that certain parts of the traditional salary basis test, specifically those concerning partial-day absences and leave for jury duty/witness/military service, were invalid for public employees due to principles of public accountability. However, the court found that the defendants violated the disciplinary penalties provision of the salary basis test, as Corrections Captains were subject to suspensions without pay for infractions not considered safety rules of major significance, based on the Corporation Counsel's admissions. Consequently, the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability was granted, denying the defendants' Portal-to-Portal Act defense.

FLSAOvertime PayPublic EmployeesSalary Basis TestDisciplinary ActionsSummary JudgmentBona Fide Executive ExemptionPublic AccountabilityMunicipal LawLabor Law
References
29
Case No. ADJ994369 (SDO 0274313)
Regular
Sep 09, 2014

JOSE JUAREZ vs. WATKINS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision, specifically rescinding the finding that there was no basis for attorney's fees. The Board determined that the employer's unreasonable delay in paying compensation established a basis for attorney's fees under Labor Code Section 5814.5. While the applicant didn't initially cite this specific section, the issue of attorney's fees was preserved. The case is returned to the trial level for determination of reasonable attorney's fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardWatkins Manufacturing CorporationLabor Code Section 5814.5Attorney's FeesUnreasonable DelayReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeNotice of IntentionTrial Level
References
5
Case No. ADJ809010 (LAO 0877737)
Regular
Feb 28, 2012

Jessica Leaser vs. Washington Mutual, Zurich North America, SRS/SEDGWICK Claims Management Services

The Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed three days after the statutory deadline. Although the administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a notice of intent to sanction the lien claimant for proceeding to trial without a legal basis, the Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the sanctions, finding the WCJ's assessment of "no factual or legal basis" unsupported on the current record, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionJurisdictional Time LimitsRemoval on Board MotionMonetary SanctionsNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsRescinded SanctionsLien ClaimantClaims Administrator
References
4
Case No. ADJ8101494
Regular
Mar 14, 2017

ROBERTO ESCOBAR-IZARRARAS vs. ACCORN ENGINEERING, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board reconsidered a WCJ's decision disallowing the remainder of a hospital's lien. The WCJ found the lien unreasonable based on an incorrect standard, as the hospital's services were not subject to the Official Medical Fee Schedule and were to be paid on a "reasonable cost basis." The Appeals Board rescinded the prior decision, returning the case to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision. This decision clarifies that the lien claimant bears the burden of proving the reasonableness of its charges on a cost basis, not just its usual fees.

WCABReconsiderationLien ClaimantMonrovia Memorial HospitalKunz studyReasonable Cost BasisOMFSLabor Code § 4600Burden of ProofPreponderance of the Evidence
References
2
Case No. ADJ7561791
Regular
Mar 19, 2012

LUIS PEREZ vs. COUNTY OF MONTEREY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify an award of temporary disability benefits for an incarcerated inmate injured while working for the County of Monterey. The County argued it shouldn't be liable for continuing benefits since they couldn't offer modified employment to the released inmate. The Board found the original award lacked a sufficient legal basis for the duration and nature of the temporary disability. Therefore, the Board rescinded the Supplemental Award and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify the basis for the award.

Industrial injuryIncarcerated inmateTemporary disabilityModified employmentEqual protection*Del Taco v. Workers' Comp. Appeals. Bd.*Supplemental AwardQualified Medical ExaminerPermanent and stationary statusLateral epicondylitis
References
2
Case No. ADJ4024660 (LAO 0887729)
Regular
Feb 03, 2017

ALFREDO COLLAZO vs. MECA NAG CORPORATION, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the case to the trial level for a new decision. The WCJ erred in determining the lien claimant's entitlement to payment solely on a multiplier of Medicare rates, rather than a reasonable cost basis. The Board clarified that while the facility's charges are not subject to the Official Medical Fee Schedule, their entitlement must be based on their actual costs plus a reasonable profit. Therefore, further proceedings are required to properly assess the reasonable cost basis for the services rendered.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and OrderLien ClaimantReasonable Cost BasisMedicare ReimbursementOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleLong Term Care HospitalKunz StudyTapia
References
2
Case No. ADJ7730252
Regular
Jul 22, 2015

MARIA OLVERA vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reconsidered sanctions imposed by a WCJ against applicant's attorney and representative for failing to disclose a cumulative trauma claim and proceeding to trial without a legal basis. The Board rescinded one sanction for failure to disclose, finding no legal mandate for immediate disclosure, and clarified which parties were sanctioned for proceeding to trial without basis, reducing the penalties. The Board affirmed the award of costs to the defendant for defending against these actions. One Commissioner dissented, believing the conduct was not sanctionable given the evidence presented by applicant's representatives.

WCABSanctionsCostsLabor Code 5813Rule 10561Hearing RepresentativeCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryDue ProcessBill of Particulars
References
1
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 04379 [32 NY3d 982]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 14, 2018

Matter of Natasha W. v. New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.

The Court of Appeals reversed an Appellate Division order, dismissing the petition in a case where Natasha W. was placed on the Child Abuse Register for attempted shoplifting with her five-year-old child. The Court found a rational basis for the Administrative Law Judge's conclusion that the child was in imminent risk of impairment due to maltreatment and that Natasha W.'s actions were relevant to childcare employment. The dissent argued that there was no 'imminent danger' as required by statute and that the ALJ's prediction of future harm was speculative and lacked factual basis, criticizing the majority for creating a per se rule of neglect without specific proof of harm.

Child MaltreatmentShoplifting IncidentAdministrative ReviewRational Basis TestArbitrary and CapriciousImminent DangerChild Neglect DefinitionFamily Court ActSocial Services LawChild Abuse Register
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wyant v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.

The plaintiffs, Susan and Edward Wyant, sought to amend their personal injury complaint to include Nelson Maintenance Services, Inc. as an additional defendant and to remand the case to state court. Defendant Amtrak opposed, requesting to amend its notice of removal for an alternative federal jurisdiction basis. The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to add Nelson Maintenance, finding it a proper party. Since Nelson Maintenance's joinder destroyed diversity jurisdiction, the case was remanded to the New York State Supreme Court, New York County. Amtrak's request to amend its notice of removal to add a federal question jurisdiction basis was denied as untimely.

JoinderDiversity JurisdictionRemandFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 15Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 20Personal InjuryFederal Question JurisdictionNotice of RemovalAmendment of PleadingsSubject Matter Jurisdiction
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 1,071 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