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

Claim of Craig v. Jefferson Auto Painting Co.

The claimant, an automobile sander and polisher, sustained eye injuries when a coemployee threw a chemical solution during an assault. The incident occurred after the claimant refused to participate in a false accusation against a foreman, leading to threats during working hours and the actual assault immediately after work, just outside the employer's premises. The Workers' Compensation Board determined the assault was work-connected and within the reasonable time and space limits of employment, thus finding the resultant disability compensable. The employer and its insurance carrier appealed, challenging the applicability of the proximity rule and the determination that the incident occurred in the course of employment. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, relying on the 'continued altercation rule' which allows recovery for work-connected quarrels extending beyond employment limits, and emphasized that an employee remains in the course of employment until a suitable opportunity to leave the workplace is provided.

Workers' CompensationAssaultWork-Connected InjuryEmployment ScopeContinued Altercation RulePremises LiabilityCoemployee MisconductDisability BenefitsAppealJudicial Review
References
3
Case No. ADJ8334555
Regular
Apr 05, 2013

JOSE HERNANDEZ vs. BRYAN MIMAKI dba PACIFIC RIMS, PALMS; ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns whether a knee injury sustained by an employee, Jose Hernandez, while playing basketball on company premises during lunch is compensable. The defendant argued the injury did not arise out of employment, as it stemmed from voluntary participation in an athletic activity not required by the employer. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the finding that the injury was industrial. The majority found the employee's subjective belief of employer expectation was objectively reasonable, given the employer provided a court and balls and supervisors encouraged participation. Commissioner Lowe dissented, arguing the applicant failed to demonstrate an objectively reasonable belief of employer expectation, as he could opt out and faced no repercussions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryRight KneeField WorkerBasketball GameOff-Duty Recreational ActivityLabor Code Section 3600(a)(9)Reasonable Expectancy of EmploymentSubjective BeliefObjective Reasonableness
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Okonski v. Pollio Dairy Products Corp.

Claimant sustained a work-related back injury in September 1987 and was subsequently paid temporary total disability benefits. Medical evaluations in December 1987 and January 1988 indicated that the claimant had a continuing partial disability but could perform light duty work, which the employer offered. The employer contended that the claimant's loss of wages after January 18, 1988, was due to her failure to accept this light duty offer, constituting a voluntary withdrawal from the labor market. The Workers’ Compensation Board concluded that the claimant did not voluntarily leave the labor market, finding her actions, including her initial reluctance to work the night shift due to its impact on her daughter's well-being and her attempts to contact the employer for alternative arrangements, to be reasonable. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding no basis to overturn its findings.

Workers Compensation AppealLight Duty EmploymentVoluntary Withdrawal from Labor MarketPartial DisabilityWage LossEmployer OfferReasonableness of RefusalNight ShiftDaughter's Well-beingHuman Resources Manager
References
1
Case No. ADJ9725488
Regular
Nov 13, 2015

Norris Hollie vs. Management Training Corporation, Zurich American Insurance Company, ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration for applicant Norris Hollie, upholding a finding that his right knee injury on April 27, 2014, did not arise out of or occur in the course of his employment. The Board agreed that Hollie's participation in a continuing medical education program, while necessary to maintain his license, was not a reasonable expectation of his employment as a physician. There was no evidence of employer mandate, knowledge, or encouragement of this specific off-duty educational activity. Therefore, the injury sustained during this program was not deemed industrial.

Continuing educationMedical license renewalOff-duty activityReasonable expectancy of employmentCourse of employmentArising out of employmentIndustrial injuryPetition for reconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJ Report
References
3
Case No. ADJ20699429
Regular
Sep 15, 2025

VICENTE RAMIREZ vs. FAMILY RANCH, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Vicente Ramirez sought reconsideration of a Findings of Fact and Award (F&A) issued by a Workers' Compensation Judge, challenging the findings regarding his employment status and the calculation of his average weekly wage and temporary disability rate. The Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's conclusion that the applicant was not a seasonal employee and had a reasonable expectation of continued employment. The Board found that the evidence presented by the defendant did not support the claim of seasonal employment, affirming the WCJ's calculations for average weekly wage and temporary disability rate.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardSeasonal EmployeeReasonable Expectation of Continued EmploymentAverage Weekly WageTemporary Disability IndemnityLabor Code section 5909Electronic Adjudication Management SystemFarm Laborer
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

The Communications Workers of America/Graduate Employees Union (CWA) petitioned the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to be certified as the bargaining representative for graduate and teaching assistants at State University of New York (SUNY) campuses. Initially, PERB's Director dismissed the petition, concluding that these assistants were not 'public employees' under the Taylor Law, applying a balancing test. PERB subsequently rejected this balancing test, establishing a new standard focused on the existence of a regular and substantial employment relationship not explicitly excluded by the Legislature. Under this new standard, PERB reversed the Director's decision, determining that graduate and teaching assistants are covered employees and constitute an appropriate bargaining unit. SUNY then initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to annul PERB's determination, arguing legal error in PERB's adopted test and that collective bargaining for academic issues violated public policy. The court upheld PERB's interpretation as reasonable and legally permissible, affirming PERB's determination and dismissing SUNY's petition.

Collective BargainingPublic EmployeesTaylor LawGraduate AssistantsTeaching AssistantsPublic Employment Relations BoardPERBCivil Service LawEmployment RelationshipPublic Policy
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Finchum v. Colaiacomo

The Workers’ Compensation Board issued an amended decision ruling against further development of the record on the employer’s liability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 56, and later denied the employer's request for reconsideration. The claimant was involved in a serious automobile accident while driving for an uninsured employer, leading to complex proceedings where the employer sought to assign liability to a general contractor, Cleanway Industries, Inc., and its insurer, Travelers Insurance Company. The appellate court found that the Board abused its discretion by sua sponte rescinding its prior directive to further develop the record, particularly without a compelling reason or apparent regulatory authorization. The court noted that the issue of liability had been pending for years and there were potential reasonable excuses for the employer's absence at certain hearings. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the Board's decisions and remitted the matter for further proceedings consistent with its ruling.

Workers' Compensation LawBoard DiscretionAbuse of DiscretionRecord DevelopmentWaiver DefenseUninsured EmployerGeneral Contractor LiabilityInsurance CoverageAppellate ReviewRemittal
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Blain v. Emsig Manufacturing Corp.

On March 29, 1993, the claimant suffered back and neck injuries from a fall at her workplace. She continued working until June 2, 1993, when severe pain prevented her from continuing. At this point, she notified her employer of the work-related injury while submitting a disability benefits request. A formal workers' compensation claim was filed on August 31, 1993, exceeding the statutory 30-day notice period. The Workers’ Compensation Board excused the late notice, determining the claimant informed her employer as soon as the injury's severity was realized. The appellate court affirmed this decision, clarifying that proving prejudice to the employer is not a prerequisite for excusing late notice.

Workers' CompensationNotice of InjuryTimely NoticeEmployer NotificationDisability BenefitsBack InjuryNeck InjuryExcuse for Late NoticePrejudiceBoard Decision Affirmed
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Greece Support Service Employees Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations Board

This case concerns an appeal regarding the proper application of Civil Service Law § 209-a (1) (e) to salary provisions in an expired collective bargaining agreement between an unnamed petitioner and the Greece Central School District. The agreement, from July 1992 to June 1995, included cost-of-living adjustments for salary schedules during its term. After the agreement expired, the District continued existing salary schedules but ceased further cost-of-living adjustments for 1995-1996, prompting the petitioner to file an improper practice charge. The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) reversed an Administrative Law Judge's decision, concluding that the agreement did not mandate continued cost-of-living adjustments post-expiration. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitioner's subsequent CPLR article 78 petition seeking annulment of PERB's determination. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, deferring to PERB's expertise and finding its interpretation that the adjustments were limited to the agreement's term to be reasonable and legally permissible.

Collective Bargaining AgreementSalary AdjustmentCost-of-Living AdjustmentPublic EmployerImproper Practice ChargeCivil Service LawPublic Employment Relations BoardJudicial ReviewCPLR Article 78Statutory Interpretation
References
6
Case No. ADJ7813892
Regular
Oct 26, 2018

LEOBARDO GIJON (Deceased), CELEDONIA MARTINEZ (Widow), ESAU GIJON vs. ROBERT WAYNE ROBINSON, DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AS ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case concerns the fatal injury of Leobardo Gijon, who was run over by a backhoe on the property of uninsured employer Robert Wayne Robinson. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is reconsidering its prior decision that Gijon's death arose out of and occurred in the course of his employment (AOE/COE). The defendant argues the WCAB failed to adequately address the AOE/COE issue, contending Gijon was operating the backhoe for personal reasons. However, the WCAB found substantial evidence that Gijon's operation of the backhoe was authorized by the employer and reasonably contemplated by the employment, especially as it was to be considered payment for ongoing work. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.

AOE/COEUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundDeceased employeeFatal injuryBackhoe accidentWelding workCompensable injuryCourse of employmentDual purpose doctrineZone of danger
References
22
Showing 1-10 of 14,355 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