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

In re Daughtry A.

In a neglect proceeding under Family Court Act article 10, the mother appealed an amended order of fact-finding and disposition and an order of protection from the Family Court, Kings County. The appellate court dismissed the appeal from the order of protection, deeming it academic due to its expiration. The court affirmed the amended order of fact-finding and disposition, finding no violation of the mother's due process rights concerning the admission of her statements. The petitioner agency successfully established a prima facie case of neglect, which the mother failed to rebut with a credible explanation for the child's injuries.

Neglect ProceedingFamily Court Act Article 10Appellate ReviewFact-FindingDispositional HearingsOrder of ProtectionDue ProcessAdmissions as EvidencePrima Facie CasePreponderance of Evidence
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of I-Conscious R. (George S.)

This case involves an appeal concerning a Family Court order that determined a respondent father abused and neglected his daughter and derivatively abused and neglected his son. The appellate court affirmed the fact-finding order, concluding that the petitioner presented a preponderance of evidence, including medical findings of genital herpes in the child, indicative of sexual abuse. The court upheld the neglect finding due to the father's failure to secure timely medical care for his daughter's severe symptoms. Additionally, the respondent's arguments regarding the suggestiveness of interviews, the testimony of his expert witness, and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were all rejected by the court. An appeal against a separate order of protection was dismissed due to abandonment.

Child AbuseChild NeglectSexual AbuseGenital HerpesMedical EvidenceFamily Court ProceedingsSufficiency of EvidenceCredibility AssessmentIneffective Assistance of CounselAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. ADJ9202893
Regular
Aug 29, 2016

JUAN JOSE ALVAREZ vs. FOOTHILL PACKING, INC.; SPARTA INSURANCE, Administered by YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Foothill Packing's petition for reconsideration, rescinding Finding of Fact No. 5. This finding ambiguously stated the applicant suffered an industrial event to his neck, shoulder, hip, back, and chest based on his credible testimony. The Board found this finding redundant and misleading, as the WCJ also determined the record needed further development regarding these orthopedic injuries. Therefore, Finding of Fact No. 5 was rescinded, but the WCJ's decision to develop the record further on these claims was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderIndustrial injuryLabor Code section 5310Agreed Medical EvaluatorQualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial evidenceSpecific injuryThreshold issue
References
11
Case No. SAC 0343316
Regular
Aug 14, 2007

MELODY BRIDGES vs. SCHURMAN FINE PAPERS, CRUM & FORSTER

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of its prior order dismissing the applicant's petition, finding it was timely filed. Despite the applicant's petition being deemed timely, the Board, adopting the Judge's report, ultimately denied reconsideration of the original April 4, 2007 findings. This rescinds the dismissal order but affirms the denial of the initial request for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition to VacateOpinion and Order Dismissing ReconsiderationTimeliness of FilingPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ Findings and OrdersTemporary DisabilitySalary During DisabilityProof of ServiceElectronic Case History Log
References
0
Case No. 103 B.R. 416
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 01, 1989

Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. International Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace Workers (In Re Ionosphere Clubs, Inc.)

The court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law, granting a preliminary injunction against the IAM for their unlawful strike activities targeting Eastern Air Lines at LaGuardia and Hartsfield Airports. The enjoined conduct includes trespassing, mass picketing, harassment, violence, and vandalism against Eastern's employees, customers, and property. The court found that these actions caused substantial and irreparable harm to Eastern and that public authorities were unable or unwilling to provide adequate protection. While the injunction imposed strict restrictions on these disruptive behaviors, the court denied Eastern's request to enjoin residential picketing, citing the Norris-LaGuardia Act. This decision aims to balance the unions' right to strike with Eastern's need to continue operations and protect its assets and personnel during the Chapter 11 reorganization.

Preliminary InjunctionLabor DisputeAirline IndustryStrike ActivityUnlawful ConductMass PicketingHarassmentVandalismUnion LiabilityNorris-LaGuardia Act
References
116
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Monique M.

The mother appealed a fact-finding order that found she abused her child Sonique M. and derivatively abused Monique M., Treston D., and Daymondray T., and two dispositional orders. The evidence showed the mother allowed her boyfriend, against whom an order of protection was issued, back into her home, where he sexually abused Sonique M., and the mother failed to intervene. However, the Family Court erred by issuing the dispositional orders without first conducting a mandatory dispositional hearing, which violated due process. The appellate court reversed the orders of disposition and remitted the matter to the Family Court, Kings County, for a dispositional hearing before a different judge due to concerns about the original judge's impartiality.

Child AbuseDerivative AbuseDispositional HearingFamily Court Act Article 10Parental JudgmentOrder of Protection ViolationSexual AbuseJudicial ImpartialityDue ProcessRemittitur
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 06, 2014

Claim of Kettavong v. Livingston County SNF

The Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) rescinded the transfer of liability from the employer to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases, finding that the claimant's case was not truly closed when the transfer was initially requested. This was due to an unresolved issue of permanent disability, which an independent medical examination report in 2005 had raised. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier appealed the WCB's decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the WCB's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that the case was not closed. The Court also upheld the WCB's authority to rescind prior findings despite the lack of a timely appeal.

Workers' Compensation Law § 25-aSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesTransfer of LiabilityCase ClosingPermanent Partial DisabilityReduced EarningsIndependent Medical ExaminationMaximum Medical ImprovementSubstantial EvidenceBoard Discretion
References
10
Case No. ADJ803377 (RIV 0075685) ADJ6675892
Regular
Oct 05, 2017

SANDRA ARMENTA vs. SAN BERNARDINO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to address a plainly erroneous finding of fact in an Independent Medical Review (IMR) determination. The IMR incorrectly stated there was no documentation of constipation, despite medical reports confirming this issue, which was a basis for denying Amitiza. The WCAB also noted a case numbering error in the original findings of fact. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the findings and returned the matter to the trial level for correction and further proceedings regarding the IMR determination's validity.

WCABReconsiderationIndependent Medical Review Determination (IMR)Findings of Fact (FOF)San Bernardino Sheriff's DepartmentApplicantPlainly Erroneous FactDocumentationPain ReliefFunctional Benefit
References
2
Case No. ADJ10954606
Regular
Mar 09, 2020

DORIT DAVIDOFF vs. UCLA MEDICAL CENTER, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify findings of fact regarding industrial injury AOE/COE. The Board rescinded the previous decision and substituted a new Findings and Award to specifically address the stipulated injury to the lumbar spine, ensuring the award of permanent disability benefits was properly supported. The Board clarified that stipulations agreed upon by the parties should be treated as findings of fact to meet statutory requirements. The decision confirms permanent disability for the left ankle, thoracic spine, and lumbar spine, denies claims for neck and knee injuries, and orders further medical treatment and attorney fees.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryLumbar SpineThoracic SpineLeft AnkleAOE/COEStipulationJurisdictional FactsFindings of Fact
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 22, 2009

In re Jessica L.

This case concerns an appeal by a father against a finding of neglect regarding his two children. The children resided with their mother, who had a history of drug use. The father, suspecting the mother was currently using drugs, anonymously contacted the Administration for Children's Services (ACS). Although the mother subsequently tested positive for cocaine, the appellate court reversed the Family Court's neglect finding against the father. The court determined that the father's actions, including his proactive call to ACS, met the minimum degree of care required and did not constitute neglect, thereby vacating the finding and dismissing the petition against him.

Family LawChild NeglectParental RightsAppellate ReviewFamily CourtSubstance AbuseDrug TestingACS InterventionMinimum Degree of CareReversal of Finding
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 19,687 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