Updated Daily

Case Law Database

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

Case No. ADJ3564079 (SDO 0254307)

Regular

Sep 07, 2011

RAUL PEREZ vs. USA WASTE SERVICES, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration for lien claimant Langlink Interpreters, Inc. (LC) regarding their $\$5,175$ lien for interpreter services. The original judge disallowed the lien, citing lack of proof of necessity, availability of bilingual staff, and pre-authorization. The Board rescinded the original order, returning the case for further proceedings, and established that employers must provide reasonably required interpreter services under Labor Code section 4600. LC now bears the burden to prove services were reasonably required, provided, qualified, and reasonably priced, as per the *Guitron* decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardlien claimantinterpreter servicesmedical treatmentLabor Code section 4600burden of proofreasonably requiredstipulated Awardpermanent disabilityindustrial injury

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Plaintiff Volt Technical Services Corp. applied for H-2 visas for nuclear start-up technicians, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) denied, asserting the need was permanent, not temporary. After the denial was affirmed on appeal, Volt filed suit, alleging the INS's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the INS's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act § 101(a)(15)(H)(ii), which requires the employer's need for services to be temporary, not just the individual assignments. Finding that Volt demonstrated a recurring need for such technicians over several years, the court granted the INS's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Volt's.

Immigration LawH-2 visasNonimmigrant WorkersTemporary EmploymentImmigration and Nationality ActAdministrative Procedures ActDeclaratory Judgment ActAgency InterpretationJudicial ReviewNuclear Industry

References

Case No. ADJ15495483; ADJ15494417

Regular

Sep 30, 2025

GLADYS SERRANO vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The cost petitioner, Platinum Copy, sought reconsideration of a WCJ's 'Joint Findings, Order, and Opinion on Decision' that denied their petitions for medical-legal costs and sanctions. The WCJ had granted defendant's motion to quash subpoenas and found Platinum Copy failed to prove their entitlement to recover costs due to unreasonableness and lack of necessity of the services. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, concluding that Platinum Copy failed to establish the reasonableness and necessity of the incurred services, including improper service of subpoenas, thus denying the Petition for Reconsideration.

WCABPlatinum CopyPetition for ReconsiderationMotion to QuashMedical Legal CostsSubpoenasContested ClaimLabor Code Section 5909Colamonico v. Secure TransportationAD Rule 9982

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Americredit Financial Services, Inc. v. Oxford Management Services

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (AmeriCredit) commenced an action to confirm an arbitration award against Oxford Management Services (OMS). OMS cross-moved to vacate the award, alleging the arbitrator exceeded his powers by dismissing a counterclaim and manifestly disregarded the law. The arbitrator had dismissed OMS's counterclaim for spoilation of evidence. The Court affirmed the arbitrator's decision, finding he did not exceed his authority under the RSA by dismissing the counterclaim or by interpreting the contract terms regarding account termination. The Court also found no manifest disregard for the law, concluding the arbitrator's decision was rationally supported by the record. Consequently, AmeriCredit's motion to confirm the award was granted, and OMS's motion to vacate was denied.

Arbitration Award ConfirmationArbitration Award VacaturFederal Arbitration ActManifest Disregard of LawArbitrator PowersSpoilation of EvidenceContract InterpretationCollection Agency DisputeSummary ProceedingJudicial Review of Arbitration

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

American International Telephone, Inc. v. Mony Travel Services, Inc.

Plaintiff American International Telephone, Inc. (AIT) sought an extension of time to serve defendant Carlos Duran, president of Mony Travel Services of Florida, Inc., after initial attempts at service were unsuccessful and Duran claimed to have moved. The court found AIT exercised reasonably diligent efforts and that extending the deadline would not prejudice Duran, who was aware of the action. Concurrently, Mony Travel Services of Florida moved for a protective order against depositions of Duran and its counsel, Francis Markey. The court denied the protective order for Duran's deposition, allowing inquiry into service of process issues. However, the protective order for Markey was granted, as mailing a copy of the complaint to an attorney is not a valid method of service under Florida law. The court granted AIT an extension to serve Duran until October 26, 2001, with conditions regarding deposition timing.

Service of ProcessExtension of TimeProtective OrderDepositionFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureJurisdictionGood CausePrejudiceFlorida LawCivil Procedure

References

Case No. ADJ779198 (SJO 0267719)

Regular

Nov 19, 2010

EVELIN GARCIA vs. SERVICE PERFORMANCE CORPORATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB granted reconsideration and reversed a prior award for interpreting services, finding the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof. The claimant did not demonstrate the interpreting services were reasonable, necessary, or provided by qualified interpreters. Crucially, the medical provider's office advertised Spanish-speaking staff, and the doctor himself spoke Spanish, negating the necessity for external interpretation services. Therefore, the lien for interpreter fees was disallowed.

WCABReconsiderationLien ClaimantInterpreting ServicesQualified InterpreterReasonablenessNecessityBurden of ProofLabor Code Section 4600Labor Code Section 5811

References

Case No. ADJ4016080 (VNO 0496113)

Regular

Sep 08, 2009

SUZANNE KUYUMDZHYAN vs. JONS MARKETPLACE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration for both the defendant and lien claimant concerning an Amended Findings and Award. The original decision awarded the lien claimant payment for 18.5 hours of interpreting services, but the defendant argued the lien claimant failed to prove reasonableness and necessity of the services. The Board found the record undeveloped regarding the reasonableness and necessity of Dr. Rahimi's treatment and consequently, the derivative interpreting services. Therefore, the matter is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Findings and AwardLien claimantInterpreting servicesCertified interpreterReasonable and necessary treatmentMedical-legal reportsCompromise and ReleaseBurden of proof

References

Case No. ADJ9526304

Regular

Oct 22, 2018

GLADYS MELENDEZ vs. MYS CORPORATION/KRYSTAL KLEEN, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration for lien claimant Citywide Scanning Service, finding that the defendant waived their right to object to the reasonableness and necessity of charges by failing to file a timely objection. The Board rescinded the original award and returned the case to the trial level for a determination of reasonable fees for all services. This decision hinged on the interpretation of statutes regarding timely objections to medical-legal expenses. The failure to object within the statutory period precludes defendants from contesting reasonableness and necessity and may expose them to penalties.

Lien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJExpress Records ManagementPrime Medical ResourcesEmployers' CompensationHollywood Presbyterian Medical CenterClinical Medica San MiguelIndependent Bill Review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Rumsey v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Plaintiffs, employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services and military reservists, challenged Departmental Directive # 2212, which allowed the rescheduling of their regular days off to coincide with military drills. They claimed this violated their rights under federal and state military laws and the Equal Protection Clause, arguing it discriminated against them by not requiring similar rescheduling for other types of leave. The defendants asserted the directive was necessary to address staffing shortages and prevent abuse of military leave, noting that pass days were routinely rescheduled for various other reasons. The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and granted the defendants' cross-motion, ruling that the directive did not constitute discrimination, as it did not require 'special accommodations' for reservists beyond what was afforded to other employees, consistent with the precedent set in Monroe v. Standard Oil Co.

Military LeaveEmployment RightsWork ScheduleDiscrimination ClaimSummary Judgment MotionCollective BargainingSeniority RightsDepartmental DirectiveFederal LawState Law

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 14, 1988

Levitt v. Civil Service Commission

The City of New York appealed a Supreme Court judgment that affirmed the Civil Service Commission's decision to reject the reclassification of the deckhand position from the competitive to the noncompetitive civil service class. Petitioners argued that the Commission applied an overly strict standard, acted inconsistently with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the NY Constitution, based its decision solely on a presumption despite expert opinions, and failed to adequately state its reasoning. The Appellate Division found that the Commission properly used the term "compelling" to reflect the constitutional preference for competitive examinations and that its decision, while brief, allowed for judicial review. Citing the public safety roles of deckhands, similar to police and firefighters, the court concluded that competitive examinations are feasible and petitioners failed to demonstrate an impediment to compliance with job-relatedness requirements.

Civil Service LawJob ReclassificationCompetitive ExaminationNoncompetitive ClassPublic SafetyDeckhand PositionAppellate ReviewCivil Rights Act Title VIINew York ConstitutionArbitrary Determination

References

Showing 1-10 of 10,708 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. ADJ3564079 (SDO 0254307)

Regular

Sep 07, 2011

RAUL PEREZ vs. USA WASTE SERVICES, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardlien claimantinterpreter servicesmedical treatmentLabor Code section 4600burden of proofreasonably requiredstipulated Awardpermanent disabilityindustrial injury

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

References

Case No. ADJ15495483; ADJ15494417

Regular

Sep 30, 2025

GLADYS SERRANO vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

WCABPlatinum CopyPetition for ReconsiderationMotion to QuashMedical Legal CostsSubpoenasContested ClaimLabor Code Section 5909Colamonico v. Secure TransportationAD Rule 9982

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Americredit Financial Services, Inc. v. Oxford Management Services

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

American International Telephone, Inc. v. Mony Travel Services, Inc.

Service of ProcessExtension of TimeProtective OrderDepositionFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureJurisdictionGood CausePrejudiceFlorida LawCivil Procedure

References

Case No. ADJ779198 (SJO 0267719)

Regular

Nov 19, 2010

EVELIN GARCIA vs. SERVICE PERFORMANCE CORPORATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

WCABReconsiderationLien ClaimantInterpreting ServicesQualified InterpreterReasonablenessNecessityBurden of ProofLabor Code Section 4600Labor Code Section 5811

References

Case No. ADJ4016080 (VNO 0496113)

Regular

Sep 08, 2009

SUZANNE KUYUMDZHYAN vs. JONS MARKETPLACE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

References

Case No. ADJ9526304

Regular

Oct 22, 2018

GLADYS MELENDEZ vs. MYS CORPORATION/KRYSTAL KLEEN, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Rumsey v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Military LeaveEmployment RightsWork ScheduleDiscrimination ClaimSummary Judgment MotionCollective BargainingSeniority RightsDepartmental DirectiveFederal LawState Law

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 14, 1988

Levitt v. Civil Service Commission

Civil Service LawJob ReclassificationCompetitive ExaminationNoncompetitive ClassPublic SafetyDeckhand PositionAppellate ReviewCivil Rights Act Title VIINew York ConstitutionArbitrary Determination

References

Showing 1-10 of 10,708 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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