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

Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Durkin

The plaintiff, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, initiated an action seeking a declaration that sections 213 and 213-a of the New York State Insurance Law prohibited the retroactive payment of a wage increase. This increase of $2.85 per week was awarded by the National War Labor Board to its insurance agents, dating back to the start of arbitration proceedings. The plaintiff argued these statutes, designed to prevent excessive post-facto compensation, made such retroactive payments unlawful. However, the trial court and Appellate Division, whose decision was affirmed, concluded that the statutes were not intended to interfere with the common practice of collective bargaining and arbitration, which frequently involves retroactive wage adjustments. The court emphasized that the legislative intent behind the insurance laws was to curb abuses like bonuses and gratuities, not to hinder ordinary and orderly wage-fixing mechanisms, thereby affirming the legality of the retroactive wage increase.

Insurance RegulationRetroactive CompensationCollective Bargaining DisputesWage Arbitration AwardNew York Insurance LawLabor Relations BoardStatutory InterpretationAppellate Court RulingEmployee Benefits LitigationContractual Agreements
References
5
Case No. ADJ8386503
Regular
Feb 15, 2019

KENNETH MORRIS vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

This case involves a deputy sheriff seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The applicant was awarded an increased permanent disability rating of 83% from his prior 50% award. The defendant sought reconsideration arguing the increased disability payments were not retroactive to the original permanent and stationary date. The WCAB granted reconsideration, amending the findings to acknowledge two maximum medical improvement dates but affirming the applicant's entitlement to increased permanent disability payments retroactive to the earlier date. The WCAB also upheld the penalty for unreasonable delay in payments.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCounty of Riversidedeputy sheriffpermanent disabilitypermanent and stationary datelife pensioncost of living adjustmentCOLALabor Code section 5814agreed medical evaluator
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Haney v. Schiavone Construction

Claimant sustained a compensable injury in 1980 and was later classified as permanently totally disabled, requiring home care services provided by his spouse. Initially, home care payments were set at $525 per week. In 1989, claimant sought and was granted an increase to $1,000 per week, retroactive to January 1, 1989, based on prevailing nursing rates. The employer and carrier appealed this increase, arguing the Workers' Compensation Law did not permit such increases for spousal care and that the Board lacked authority to modify the initial valuation. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the increase. This court further affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the Workers' Compensation Law makes employers liable for necessary home care, including spousal services, and that the Board has continuing jurisdiction to modify awards and properly used prevailing health cost data to determine reasonable value.

Workers' CompensationHome Care ServicesSpousal CarePermanent Total DisabilityIncreased PaymentsPrevailing RateContinuing JurisdictionBoard AuthorityMedical ExpensesAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. ADJ555322, ADJ1127657, ADJ3643619, ADJ3733400, ADJ615070
Regular
Jan 23, 2023

RICHARD CORTEZ vs. PARAMOUNT PICTURES, MURPHY AND BEANE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Paramount Pictures' petition for reconsideration. The Board upheld the WCJ's finding that the applicant was entitled to a retroactive increase in temporary disability payments based on Labor Code Section 4661.5. The defendant failed to provide evidence to support their proposed method of calculating the earnings rate or to establish prejudice for the applicant's delay in claiming the increase. Therefore, the original award granting the increased benefits remains in effect.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Reconsideration DeniedTemporary Disability (TTD) RateLabor Code Section 4661.5Labor Code Section 4453Average Weekly EarningsUnion ContractMotion Picture Health and WelfareRetroactive IncreaseCollective Bargaining Agreement
References
4
Case No. ADJ838588 (VNO 0384987) ADJ2342741 (VNO 0384985) ADJ1363723 (VNO 0384986)
Regular
Nov 10, 2016

RICHARD PEREZ vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

This case concerns applicant Richard Perez's claim for increased permanent disability benefits for injuries sustained as a deputy sheriff. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to amend a prior award, but affirmed the WCJ's denial of the defendant's request to apportion the increased disability. The WCAB reasoned that applying the current Labor Code sections 4663 and 4664 for apportionment would retroactively amend a prior award, violating legislative intent. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to an unapportioned increase in permanent disability, with clerical errors corrected in the award.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderWCJdeputy sheriffbilateral shouldersleft kneeleft forearmstipulated awardaverage weekly earnings
References
4
Case No. ADJ608971 (SAC 0345754)
Regular
Mar 22, 2010

ROGELIO ROJAS vs. ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES INC, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE

This case involved a dispute over a 15% increase in permanent disability benefits for an employee who sustained a 100% permanent disability. The defendant argued this increase, under Labor Code section 4658(d), did not apply to total permanent disability awards and challenged the retroactive date for annual wage adjustments. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the 15% increase because Labor Code section 4658(d) applies only to permanent disability awards calculated under a specific chart, not to total permanent disability. The Board affirmed the annual wage adjustment date based on precedent and deferred attorney fees pending recalculation.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRogelio RojasAllied Waste Industries IncAmerican Home AssuranceFindings Award and Orderpermanent disabilitypermanent total disabilityLabor Code section 4658(d)(2)state average weekly wageSAWW adjustment
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Hayward

Debtors Jerald John Hayward, II and Lois Evelyn Hayward filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and claimed an increased homestead exemption of $50,000 under a New York law amendment. CFU Community Credit Union objected, arguing the amendment should not apply retroactively to pre-amendment debts. The Chapter 7 Trustee and Debtors asserted the amendment's retroactive application was intended. The court, adopting reasoning from In re Little, ruled the Homestead Exemption Amendment is a remedial statute with intended retroactive application, which does not violate the United States Constitution or creditors' vested rights. Consequently, the Debtors' claim for the higher homestead exemption was upheld, and the Credit Union's motion was denied.

Chapter 7Bankruptcy LawHomestead ExemptionRetroactive ApplicationRemedial StatutesNew York State LawCreditors' RightsVested RightsStatutory ConstructionUnited States Constitution Article 1 Section 10
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 144, Hotel, Hosp., Nur. Home & Allied Serv. v. Amer. Nur. H.

The case involves Local 144, a labor union, petitioning the District Court to confirm an arbitration award against unnamed residential health care facilities (nursing homes). The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement that included a 6.5% retroactive wage increase for union members, contingent on full Medicaid reimbursement from the State of New York. When the nursing homes claimed insufficient reimbursement and refused to pay the full increase, Local 144 initiated arbitration. Arbitrator Lois A. Rappaport found the nursing homes in violation of the agreement, directing payment of the 6.5% wage increase. District Judge William C. Conner confirmed the arbitrator's award, rejecting the nursing homes' argument that the award was not final. However, the union's request for costs and attorney's fees was denied.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementWage IncreaseLabor Management Relations ActUnited States Arbitration ActConfirmation of Arbitration AwardReimbursement Review PanelLabor DisputesFederal Court ReviewInterim Award
References
23
Case No. ADJ361974
Regular
Feb 11, 2013

ANA VELASQUEZ vs. AMERICAN BUILDING MAINTENANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a $1,000 sanction against applicant's attorney, Peter T. Brown, and his firm. The original sanction was for violating rules regarding supervision of non-attorney employees and requiring specific written authorization for settlement documents. The WCAB found Brown's conduct, including alleged misrepresentations and failure to adequately supervise his employee's submission of a compromise and release without full disclosure, warranted an increased sanction. The WCAB is now considering imposing a sanction of up to $2,500 and has given Brown an opportunity to show cause why this increase is not warranted.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderAdministrative Law JudgeCompromise and ReleaseSupervisionWritten AuthorizationCumulative TraumaGood Faith Negotiation
References
0
Case No. ADJ6610233
Regular
Nov 18, 2014

WILLIAM WILLIAMS (Deceased) vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CDCR - PLEASANT VALLEY STATE PRISON, Legally Uninsured; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES, Adjusting Agency

This case concerns a deceased correctional officer whose dependent sons were awarded death benefits. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration of its prior order requiring an offset for a CalPERS special death benefit received by the decedent's widow, deeming it consistent with precedent and statutory intent. The Board also issued a notice of intention to disallow the applicant's attorney's requested fee increase due to non-compliance with a rule regarding notice to the client of adverse interests. Compliance with this rule is required for the fee increase to be considered by the trial judge.

CalPERSspecial death benefitoffsetdeath benefitsdependent childrenattorney's feesWCAB Rule 10778adverse interestindependent counselPetiton for Reconsideration
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,083 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