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. ADJ8381778
Regular
Oct 18, 2012

GERALD BROWN vs. GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM, LIBERTY MUTUAL

In this workers' compensation case, the applicant, Gerald Brown, filed a Petition for Removal and a Petition for Disqualification against Golden Gate Petroleum and Liberty Mutual. The defendants subsequently withdrew both petitions after entering into a Compromise and Release agreement. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed both petitions as moot, as they were withdrawn and the settlement was approved by the WCJ. Therefore, no further action will be taken on the dismissed petitions.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationCompromise and ReleaseWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ8381778mootwithdrawn petitionsdismissaladministrative law judge
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dick v. John M. Gates Construction Corp.

Plaintiff Alan F. Dick was injured when a temporary deck collapsed at a construction site in July 1984 while he was working for John M. Gates Construction Corporation, the general contractor. He and his wife sued Gates Construction, Harvest Homes (materials manufacturer), and Armand Córtese (property owner) for damages. The Supreme Court denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment against Gates Construction but granted summary judgment to Harvest Homes and Córtese. Gates Construction appealed the denial of its cross-motion for partial summary judgment, arguing Labor Law § 240 (1) was inapplicable. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's order, holding that Gates Construction, as the general contractor, had a nondelegable duty under Labor Law § 240 (1) to provide proper protection and that issues of fact regarding inadequate bracing precluded summary judgment in its favor.

Construction AccidentLabor Law § 240(1)Deck CollapseSummary JudgmentGeneral ContractorNondelegable DutyAppellate ReviewPersonal InjuryWorker SafetyConstruction Site Accident
References
4
Case No. ADJ6594236
Regular
Aug 12, 2014

HERMALINDA AVILA vs. GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM, INC., EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Golden Gate Petroleum, Inc. and Employers Insurance of Wausau's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was due to the petition being filed untimely. Specifically, the defendants failed to file within the 20-day statutory period for reconsideration, plus an additional 5 days for mailing. Therefore, the WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's recommendation and dismissed the petition as procedurally defective.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedUntimelyLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013WCJ Report and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGolden Gate PetroleumInc.Employers Insurance of Wausau
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Golden v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

William Golden, a Vietnam veteran, challenged the Secretary of Health and Human Services' denial of disability benefits. Golden asserted disability since November 1980 due to severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and back problems, contrary to the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) finding of disability commencing November 1985. District Judge Curtin ruled that the ALJ incorrectly applied the treating physician rule by dismissing Dr. Herman Szymanski's retroactive diagnosis as speculative. The court emphasized that a treating physician's long-standing relationship with a patient warrants extra weight for their opinion, which Dr. Szymanski's opinion, supported by other witnesses, demonstrated despite some contradictory medical evidence. Ultimately, the court found the Secretary's denial unsupported by substantial evidence, granted Golden's motion for summary judgment, and remanded the case for benefit calculation.

PTSDDisability BenefitsSocial Security ActTreating Physician RuleRetroactive DiagnosisAdministrative Law JudgeMedical EvidenceVocational RehabilitationMental DisorderBack Pain
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2003

Local 8A-28A Welfare and 401 (K) Retirement Funds v. Golden Eagles Architectural Metal Cleaning and Refinishing

The plaintiffs, Local 8A-28A Welfare and 401(k) Retirement Funds, sued defendant Golden Eagles Architectural Metal Cleaning and Refinishing, alleging violations of ERISA Section 515 and a collective bargaining agreement for failing to submit to an audit. Golden Eagles moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, and the requirement for arbitration. The District Court, presided over by Judge Sweet, denied the motion, finding that personal jurisdiction existed over Golden Eagles due to ERISA's nationwide service of process provision, and venue was proper in the Southern District of New York as the Funds are administered there. Furthermore, the court determined that the Local 8A-28A Funds, as independent non-signatory entities, were not bound by the arbitration clause present in the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the employer. Consequently, Golden Eagles' motion to dismiss was denied.

ERISAPersonal JurisdictionVenueArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee BenefitsTrust FundsMotion to DismissNationwide Service of ProcessMinimum Contacts
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 01, 1938

Sea Gate Ass'n v. Sea Gate Tenants Ass'n

The Sea Gate Association, a private membership corporation in New York, sought a temporary injunction to prevent tenants from picketing within its private community. The association argued its right to enact and enforce rules against picketing to maintain the private residential character of Sea Gate and protect property values. The defendants, who were tenants protesting an increase in beach charges, contended that their picketing was lawful and that the streets within Sea Gate should be considered public, thus asserting violations of their constitutional rights. The court, however, emphasized the distinction between public and private rights, reaffirming the association's established authority to impose reasonable restrictions on its private property. Given that no labor dispute was involved and based on prior rulings confirming Sea Gate's private status, the court concluded that the rule against picketing was reasonable and had been breached. Consequently, the temporary injunction was granted against the defendants.

Private Property RightsTemporary InjunctionPicketing RegulationConstitutional RightsPrivate CommunityMembership CorporationProperty RegulationsTenant DisputeNew York LawBeach Access Fees
References
11
Case No. ADJ10473323 ADJ9241894
Regular
Nov 15, 2019

HECTOR GONZALEZ vs. RECOLOGY GOLDEN GATE

The WCAB granted reconsideration to amend the previous award. The Board found that applicant is entitled to a single, unapportioned award for his right knee permanent disability, as it directly resulted from unsuccessful medical treatment for both his specific and cumulative trauma injuries, per *Hikida*. Additionally, the Board determined that applicant's permanent disability should be rated using the higher Occupational Group 560, reflecting his occasional performance of more arduous duties as a garbage collector. The matter was returned to the trial level for issuance of a new award reflecting these findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardHector GonzalezRecology Golden Gatepermanent disabilityspecific injurycumulative traumaOccupational Group 350Occupational Group 560Agreed Medical Examinerapportionment
References
3
Case No. ADJ6948621 ADJ7946738
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

STEFANO MUSETTI vs. GOLDEN GATE DISPOSAL & RECYCLING dba RECOLOGY, permissibly self-insured, administered by CORVEL CORP.

In this workers' compensation case, the employer sought reconsideration of an award ordering a total knee replacement. The applicant's treating physician recommended the surgery, but the employer argued the award was premature as a panel qualified medical evaluator's report was pending and the treating physician's report lacked proper authorization markings. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the employer had sufficient time to obtain the PQME report and that the treating physician's report constituted substantial medical evidence supporting the surgery. The Board also noted that the employer failed to initiate utilization review despite being aware of the treatment request.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardindustrial injuryright kneegarbage collectortotal knee replacementsupplemental reportpanel qualified medical evaluator (PQME)treating physiciansubstantial medical evidencePetition for Reconsideration
References
7
Case No. ADJ1009271 (AHM 0055424)
Regular
Apr 27, 2009

MYRNA PEREZ vs. FIDELITY FEDERAL BANK, TIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO., REM, LTD, GOLDEN EAGLE

This case concerns a contribution dispute between two insurance carriers, TIG and Golden Eagle, for a cumulative trauma injury claim. Golden Eagle sought reconsideration of an order compelling it to pay over $\$101,000$ in contribution to TIG. Golden Eagle argued it was never properly served with a notice of intention and that Labor Code section 5275 mandates arbitration for contribution disputes. The Appeals Board agreed that mandatory arbitration applies, rescinded the order, and remanded the case for either informal resolution or arbitration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder of ContributionPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5275mandatory arbitrationContributionCumulative Trauma InjuryCompromise and Release AgreementPetition for ContributionNotice of Intention
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 1993

Konstantinovsky v. Golden Chocolate, Inc.

Vladimir Konstantinovsky, the injured plaintiff, sought damages for injuries sustained when he was struck by a forklift operated by Nemirovsky, an employee of Golden Chocolate, Inc. Golden Chocolate moved for summary judgment, arguing Nemirovsky was a special employee of Konstantinovsky's employer, Gold Star Trading Company, which would bar the suit under Workers' Compensation Law, or that Nemirovsky acted outside the scope of his employment. The Supreme Court denied this motion. The appellate court affirmed the denial of summary judgment, finding that there were issues of fact regarding whether Nemirovsky was acting within the scope of his employment or if he was a special employee of Gold Star Trading Company.

Personal InjuryForklift AccidentScope of EmploymentSpecial EmployeeSummary JudgmentAppellate DecisionNegligenceIssues of FactEmployer LiabilityKings County
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 193 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