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

Kosakow v. New Rochelle Radiology Associates, P.C.

Nancy Kosakow sued her former employer, New Rochelle Radiology Associates, alleging FMLA violations and wrongful denial of severance pay under ERISA. The court previously found FMLA claims collaterally estopped but remanded the ERISA claim to the Plan Administrator for a determination on severance eligibility. The Administrator denied severance, finding Kosakow not "terminated" and, even if so, not entitled to severance. This court reversed the "not terminated" finding, stating Kosakow was terminated due to a reduction in force. However, the court affirmed the Administrator's denial of severance, concluding that the "where applicable" clause in the Plan gave the Administrator broad discretion and that Kosakow's circumstances did not warrant severance. The court found that the denial was not unreasonable, even when considering a severance payment made to another full-time employee under different circumstances.

ERISASeverance PayFMLATerminationSummary JudgmentDe Novo ReviewPlan Administrator DiscretionEmployee BenefitsReduction in ForcePolicy Manual
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Twenty First Century L.P.I v. LaBianca

This case involves Twenty First Century L.P.I and Twenty First Century L.P.II, owners of McDonald's franchises, suing several defendants for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting, and RICO violations. The defendants, including former employees Michael Malpiedi and Richard Redzinski, engaged in a scheme to embezzle millions by submitting inflated invoices for construction work and receiving kickbacks. The court granted partial summary judgment, finding all listed defendants liable for common law fraud and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty. Malpiedi and Redzinski were also found liable for breach of fiduciary duty. Additionally, Malpiedi, Redzinski, Stephen Delli Bovi, and Delli Bovi Construction Corporation were held liable for civil RICO damages. However, the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment regarding Angelo Vignola's and D & D Electric's RICO liability was denied, leaving that issue for trial.

FraudEmbezzlementKickbacksRICOBreach of Fiduciary DutySummary JudgmentCollateral EstoppelMail FraudWire FraudInterstate Commerce
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2001

LaBarbera v. C. Volante Corp.

This action, brought under the Labor Management Relations Act and ERISA, sought recovery of delinquent pension fund contributions from October 1, 1993, to June 30, 1997. The court previously granted default judgment against C. Volante Corp. and C. Volante Trucking Corp. Plaintiffs, trustees of Local 282 Funds, moved for summary judgment against the remaining defendant, Vital Trucking Corp. The court found C. Volante Corp. liable for contributions based on its course of conduct, adopting collective bargaining agreements. C. Volante Trucking Corp. was found jointly liable under the 'single employer' theory due to shared operations, management, and ownership with C. Volante Corp. Vital Trucking Corp. was found jointly and severally liable under the 'alter ego' theory, as it was formed shortly after Volante/Trucking ceased operations, sharing substantially identical business purpose, equipment, customers, and management with the Volante family, indicating an attempt to avoid CBA obligations. The court denied Vital's motion for summary judgment and granted plaintiffs' motion, adopting the Magistrate Judge's recommendation for damages.

Labor Management Relations ActEmployee Retirement Income Security ActPension Fund ContributionsDelinquent ContributionsSummary JudgmentDefault JudgmentSingle Employer DoctrineAlter Ego DoctrineCollective Bargaining AgreementUnion Labor
References
16
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 04796
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 2024

U.S. Bank N.A. v. DCCA, LLC

This case involves an appeal from an order and a money judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action. The plaintiff Anderson Hill Road Capital, LLC, appeals a decision by the Supreme Court, Westchester County, which found it liable for expenditures related to alleged violations of the New York State Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act) incurred by temporary receiver Kirby D. Payne. The underlying issue stemmed from the abrupt closure of the Doral Arrowwood Resort and Hotel, owned by DCCA, LLC, where a temporary receiver was appointed to manage operations. The receiver requested funding to continue operations, which was initially provided by the Trustee (U.S. Bank National Association) but later denied by Anderson Hill Road Capital, LLC, after it purchased the note. This led to the issuance of WARN Act notices to employees due to the impending closure. The Supreme Court held Anderson Capital jointly and severally liable for the WARN Act violation costs. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal from the order as it was superseded by the money judgment and affirmed the money judgment, finding that special circumstances existed to hold Anderson Capital liable for the receiver's expenses, including the WARN Act sum, given its predecessor's (the Trustee's) involvement and benefit from the receivership.

Mortgage ForeclosureTemporary ReceiverWARN ActReceiver ExpensesJoint and Several LiabilityAppellate ReviewMoney JudgmentProperty ManagementSpecial ServicerCommercial Mortgage-Backed Security
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2009

Trzaska v. Allied Frozen Storage, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County, which denied the plaintiffs' motion to sever workers' compensation claims from their personal injury action. The appellate court, composed of Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Peradotto, Green, and Gorski, JJ., unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision, upholding the denial of the severance motion.

Personal InjuryWorkers' CompensationSeverance MotionAppellate ReviewSupreme CourtErie CountyOrder Denial
References
0
Case No. SDO 0249452
Regular
May 12, 2008

GAIL GODFREY vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, PROFESSIONAL RESOURCE ENTERPRISE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION by BROADSPIRE for SUPERIOR PACIFIC CASUALTY COMPANY

The California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found that the County of San Diego was the applicant's special employer, making them jointly and severally liable for her injury. This determination was made despite a contract stating the applicant was not a County employee, as the Board found sufficient evidence of San Diego's control over her work. Consequently, the County is considered "other insurance available" to the applicant, meaning CIGA is not liable for her benefits.

CIGAcovered claimspecial employergeneral employerlabor brokerageindustrial injuryinsolvent insurerother insurancejoint and several liabilitycontractual exclusion
References
14
Case No. MON 0271251 MON 0271252 MON 0271253
Regular
Jan 09, 2008

CONSUELO AMADOR vs. JIMWAY, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for FREMONT INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, by CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns liability for an applicant's cumulative trauma injury where both Fremont Indemnity (represented by CIGA) and the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) provided coverage. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed an arbitrator's decision, finding that SCIF, as a solvent insurer jointly and severally liable for the injury, constitutes "other insurance." Therefore, under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9), CIGA is not liable for the applicant's cumulative trauma injury.

CIGAFremont IndemnitySCIFcumulative traumajoint and several liabilitycovered claimother insuranceInsolvencyLabor Code section 5500.5Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9)
References
12
Case No. OXN 0125163, OXN 0125194
Regular
Apr 04, 2008

ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ vs. SCARBOROUGH FARMS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, BROADSPIRE, SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.

This case involves a dispute over reimbursement between the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) and the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) concerning workers' compensation benefits paid to an applicant for knee injuries sustained at different times. The Court of Appeal ruled that SCIF is jointly and severally liable for the benefits and must reimburse CIGA for 100% of its outlay, totaling $43,505.53. This decision reverses the Board's prior determination that SCIF was only liable for 25% of the benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationState Compensation Insurance FundSuperior National Insurance Co.liquidationspecific injurycumulative injuryagreed medical evaluatorapportionment
References
2
Case No. ADJ158556 (MON 0206719) ADJ1611743 (MON 0222554) ADJ137665 (MON 0271624) ADJ1710332 (MON 0247216) ADJ716421 (MON 0222553)
Regular
Jun 27, 2011

Neil M. Lamont vs. BOEING, AIG/CHARTIS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves apportionment of permanent disability benefits for multiple industrial injuries sustained by the applicant, Neil M. Lamont. The defendant, Chartis, sought reconsideration of an award finding them liable for reimbursement from CIGA, arguing the medical evidence was insufficient. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the arbitrator's report. The Board found that due to the "inextricably intertwined" nature of the applicant's disabilities, as testified by the agreed medical examiner, apportionment of causation was impossible. Therefore, a joint and several award was justified, making the solvent defendant (Chartis) solely liable, thus relieving CIGA.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and OrderArbitratorSubstantial EvidenceInextricably Intertwined DisabilityApportionment of LiabilityCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)Insolvent Insurance CarrierCovered Claims
References
9
Case No. ADJ 536917 (PAS 0038447), ADJ 4107955 (PAS 0038446)
Regular
Jul 26, 2016

DONALD SCHILLING vs. STARLINE TOURS OF HOLLYWOOD, SCIF, CIGA FOR SUPERIOR PACIFIC CASUALTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted CIGA's petition for reconsideration, rescinding a prior order that held CIGA liable for 50% of the applicant's future medical treatment costs. The Board found that recent case law indicates a final apportionment award does not alter the joint and several nature of liability among insurers. CIGA argued it is not liable if other insurance, like SCIF's, is available, citing Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9). The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to address CIGA's contentions and potential laches defense, which requires a showing of prejudice.

CIGASuperior Pacific Casualty CompanySCIFPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersApportionmentJoint and Several LiabilityOther InsuranceLachesPrejudice
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 2,814 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