Updated Daily

Case Law Database

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

Case No. ADJ708401 (STK 0181388)

Regular

Apr 08, 2011

SONNY TRAVAO vs. E & J GALLO WINERY, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves an employer's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision finding an applicant sustained an industrial shoulder injury and was entitled to further medical treatment, including Lortab. The employer argued the Utilization Review (UR) denial of Lortab was timely, but the WCAB denied reconsideration. The Board determined the UR denial was untimely because it was issued after the statutory deadline for review, thus deeming the treatment authorized. The employer's arguments regarding procedural errors were deemed irrelevant to the timeliness issue.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSONNY TRAVAOE & J GALLO WINERYFindings and Awardindustrial injurybilateral shoulderscumulative traumaUtilization Review (UR) denialLortabRule 10858

References

Case No. ADJ1817205 (RIV 0076837) ADJ2824273 (RIV 0076838)

Regular

Jul 02, 2014

SONNY LOVELESS vs. NEWPORT FARMS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE CO., VIRGINIA SURETY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a dispute over reimbursement for workers' compensation benefits paid by CIGA. The Appeals Board affirmed an arbitrator's decision granting CIGA full reimbursement from Virginia Surety and Zurich for benefits paid to the applicant. Virginia Surety's arguments that the cumulative trauma periods should be reevaluated and that CIGA was liable for the first period were rejected. The Board found Virginia Surety is bound by prior stipulations establishing two cumulative trauma periods, making its coverage "other insurance" under Insurance Code § 1063.1(c)(9) and thus excluding CIGA's liability for those benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSonny LovelessNewport FarmsCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA)Superior NationalZurich American Insurance Co.Virginia Surety Insurance Companycumulative traumastipulated awardreimbursement

References

Case No. 02 Civ. 7659(SAS)

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 12, 2004

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 100 v. NYC Transit Auth.

This case involves a dispute between several labor unions and the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) and its subsidiary regarding the legality of NYCTA's sick leave policy under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The unions challenged the policy's medical inquiry requirements, arguing they violated ADA provisions against inquiries that may reveal a disability. The NYCTA justified its policy by citing the need to curb sick leave abuse and ensure workplace and public safety. The court applied the framework established in Conroy v. New York State Department of Correctional Services. It found that curbing sick leave abuse was a legitimate business necessity but only justified the policy for employees on a narrowly-defined "sick leave control list." The court also determined that ensuring safety was a vital business necessity, justifying the policy for safety-sensitive employees, specifically bus operators, but required further factual development for other employee groups. Ultimately, the court issued a declaratory judgment, clarifying the permissible scope of the policy's medical inquiries and rejecting the Authority's defenses of unclean hands and laches.

ADA ComplianceSick Leave PolicyMedical InquiryEmployment DiscriminationBusiness Necessity DefenseWorkplace SafetyPublic SafetyLabor Union LitigationCollective BargainingBus Operator

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sun Trading Distributing Co. v. Evidence Music, Inc.

Plaintiff Sun Trading Distributing Co., doing business as Muse Records and Landmark Records, filed a lawsuit against Evidence Music, Inc. and Kenwood Electronics Corp. alleging unfair competition under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act and New York State common law. The core of the complaint revolved around the defendants' alleged unauthorized exploitation of sound recordings by jazz artists John Hicks, Edward “Sonny” Stitt, and Antoine Roney. Sun Trading claimed false designation of origin (reverse passing off) for the Stitt recording and false advertising for the Roney recording, leading to consumer confusion. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the Lanham Act claims, finding insufficient evidence of actual or likelihood of consumer confusion. Consequently, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice, and denied the plaintiff's cross-motion to amend the complaint.

Lanham ActUnfair CompetitionTrademark InfringementCopyrightSound RecordingsJazz MusicConsumer ConfusionSummary JudgmentSupplemental JurisdictionBreach of Contract

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 27, 2006

Southerland v. City of New York

Plaintiff Sonny Southerland, Sr., on behalf of himself and his children, sued the City of New York and caseworker Timothy Woo under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations stemming from the removal of his children from his custody in 1997. The plaintiffs claimed unlawful search and seizure, and procedural and substantive due process violations related to the investigation and emergency removal of the children by ACS caseworker Woo. The court addressed Woo's qualified immunity defense for each claim, finding him entitled to qualified immunity due to the lack of clearly established law at the time of the events or the objective reasonableness of his actions. Furthermore, the court found summary judgment appropriate on the merits of Southerland's Fourth Amendment and substantive due process claims, and the plaintiff children's unlawful search claim. Finally, the City of New York was also granted summary judgment, as plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a municipal policy or deliberate indifference in training that caused the alleged constitutional deprivations.

42 U.S.C. § 1983Qualified ImmunityFourth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentProcedural Due ProcessSubstantive Due ProcessChild Protective ServicesChild RemovalSummary JudgmentMunicipal Liability

References

Showing 1-5 of 5 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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

SONNY TRAVAO vs. E & J GALLO WINERY, Permissibly Self-Insured

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSONNY TRAVAOE & J GALLO WINERYFindings and Awardindustrial injurybilateral shoulderscumulative traumaUtilization Review (UR) denialLortabRule 10858

SONNY LOVELESS vs. NEWPORT FARMS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE CO., VIRGINIA SURETY INSURANCE COMPANY

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 100 v. NYC Transit Auth.

ADA ComplianceSick Leave PolicyMedical InquiryEmployment DiscriminationBusiness Necessity DefenseWorkplace SafetyPublic SafetyLabor Union LitigationCollective BargainingBus Operator

Sun Trading Distributing Co. v. Evidence Music, Inc.

Lanham ActUnfair CompetitionTrademark InfringementCopyrightSound RecordingsJazz MusicConsumer ConfusionSummary JudgmentSupplemental JurisdictionBreach of Contract

Southerland v. City of New York

42 U.S.C. § 1983Qualified ImmunityFourth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentProcedural Due ProcessSubstantive Due ProcessChild Protective ServicesChild RemovalSummary JudgmentMunicipal Liability