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. ADJ6699348
Regular
Mar 17, 2016

KANON MONKIEWICZ vs. RM STORE FIXTURES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued a Notice of Intention to find that Labor Code section 4903.8(a) does not preclude awards to lien claimants Rx Funding Solutions, LLC and PharmaFinance, LLC. This is because the 2014 amendments to section 4903.8(a)(2) specify that it does not apply to assignments completed prior to January 1, 2013. Both of the lien claimants' assignments were made before this date, thus exempting them from the preclusion. The WCAB is amending its previous order and returning the case to the trial level for further proceedings on the merits of the liens.

Labor Code 4903.8Lien claimantsAssignment of receivablesCessation of businessPharmacy lienMedical lienSB 863AB 2732Prospective vs. retrospective applicationWCAB rules
References
10
Case No. ADJ7476466
Regular
Jul 17, 2013

JESUS AGUILAR vs. ROSABLA A. SAWERS, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORP., AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Greenway Clinic's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the dismissal of its lien. Greenway argued that electronic system malfunctions prevented timely payment of a lien activation fee required under Labor Code section 4903.06. However, the Board found this section inapplicable to liens filed after January 1, 2013, which are subject to a filing fee under section 4903.05. Because Greenway's lien was filed in 2013 without the required filing fee, it was deemed invalid and dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for reconsiderationLien activation feeElectronic Adjudication Management SystemLabor Code section 4903.06Declaration of Readiness to ProceedCompromise and ReleaseLien filing feeInvalid lien
References
0
Case No. ADJ7350560
Regular
May 21, 2013

ANDREA BARRERA vs. PET SMART, SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order dismissing Expert Medical Management's lien. The lien, filed before January 1, 2013, was subject to a lien activation fee under Labor Code Section 4903.06(a). Expert Medical Management failed to pay this fee, despite multiple opportunities, leading to the dismissal of their lien claim. The Appeals Board adopted the judge's report, which found the lien claimant's arguments regarding Labor Code Section 4903(b) amendments and penalty payments irrelevant to the activation fee requirement.

Lien activation feePetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code §4903.06(a)Medical-legal expensesLabor Code §4903(b)Expert Medical ManagementWCABWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDewayne MarshallStipulations with Request for Award
References
1
Case No. ADJ6757406
Regular
Apr 08, 2013

ESPERANZA CARRILLO vs. INTEGRATED HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, INC. (formerly WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER), REDWOOD FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order dismissing several lien claims. The dismissal was due to the lien claimants' failure to pay the required lien activation fee as mandated by Labor Code section 4903.06(a)(4). The Board also admonished certain lien claimants for failing to properly notify the employer and the Board of changes in their representatives as required by Labor Code section 4903.6(b). The WCJ's report, incorporated by the Board, found the lien claimants' arguments regarding constitutionality and procedural due process to be without merit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLien ClaimantsLabor Code section 4903.06Lien Activation FeeDismissal of LiensDue ProcessSB 899SB 863EAMS
References
4
Case No. ADJ7613459
Regular
May 07, 2013

LUIS MARTINEZ vs. ANA TERRAZAS, ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO., ADMINISTERED BY SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Appeals Board ruled that medical-legal expenses, including copy service costs for obtaining medical records, cannot be recovered through a general petition for costs under Labor Code section 5811. Such claims must instead be pursued through the established lien process, which now includes a lien activation fee under Labor Code section 4903.06. Lien claimants who withdrew their liens prior to this decision and filed petitions for costs are permitted to reinstate their liens to pursue recovery, provided they comply with the lien activation fee requirements and their liens were not otherwise dismissed. This decision aims to provide uniformity and prevent parties from avoiding statutorily mandated fees through procedural maneuvers.

SB 863Lien activation feeMedical-legal expensesPetition for costsLabor Code section 5811Labor Code section 4903.06En banc decisionReconsiderationWithdrawal of lienReinstatement principle
References
20
Case No. ADJ7133410
Regular
Dec 10, 2018

HUGO DIAZ vs. YOUTH CONNECTION OF VENTURA COUNTY, REDWOOD FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded a prior order, and returned the case for further proceedings. The administrative law judge had dismissed a lien claimant's lien for failing to timely file a declaration under Labor Code section 4903.8. However, the Board found that section 4903.8, as amended, does not mandate dismissal for pre-2013 liens with untimely declarations. While the lien is not dismissed, the Board noted that the untimely filing could be grounds for sanctions under Labor Code section 5813.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderLabor Code section 4903.8Mandatory dismissalSenate Bill 863Declaration of perjuryUntimely declarationInvalid lien
References
3
Case No. ADJ122717
Regular
Dec 13, 2012

JOE MARTINEZ vs. CDC-CORCORAN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Here is a summary of the case in four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claim by the CCPOA Benefits Trust Fund for over $42,000 paid to applicant Joe Martinez for living expenses. The Board found no statutory authority under Labor Code sections 4903 or 4903.1 to allow reimbursement for living expenses paid by a self-insured employee welfare benefit plan. Specifically, Labor Code section 4903.1(a)(3) only permits such liens for group disability policies under specific conditions not met here. The Board affirmed the trial judge's decision disallowing the lien.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimLabor Code section 4903(c)Living expensesSelf-insured employee welfare benefit planStatutory authorizationReimbursementPermanent disabilityTemporary disabilityGroup disability policy
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Pursuant to Section 304 of the Bankruptcy Code of Banco Nacional De Obras Y Servicios Publicos, S.N.C.

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) sought relief from a preliminary injunction to pursue an action against Aeronaves de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (Aeronaves) for declaratory judgment concerning a collective bargaining agreement. Aeronaves, represented by its Mexican bankruptcy trustee Banobras, objected, arguing the claims should be handled in Mexican bankruptcy court. Judge Tina L. Brozman analyzed the request in the context of section 304 of the Bankruptcy Code, emphasizing the specialized nature of American labor law, particularly the Railway Labor Act (RLA). Balancing international comity with the protection of American creditors, the court found that the issues regarding the existence and terms of the collective bargaining agreement required the expertise of an American district court. Therefore, the motion for relief from the stay was granted to permit the IAM action to proceed in the Southern District of New York.

Bankruptcy LawInternational ComitySection 304 StayRailway Labor Act (RLA)Collective Bargaining AgreementForeign BankruptcyAncillary ProceedingsDeclaratory ReliefLabor DisputeCreditor Claims
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 12, 1998

Cataudella v. Kings Bay Housing Section II, Inc.

Plaintiff Alfred Cataudella sought damages for personal injuries, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). Defendants Kings Bay Housing Section II, Inc., and Elm Management Co. moved for summary judgment to dismiss this claim, which was initially granted but later denied by the Supreme Court upon the plaintiffs' successful motion for renewal and reargument. On appeal, the higher court modified the lower court's decision, ruling that Labor Law § 240 (1) did not apply as the plaintiff's injuries were not from an elevation-related hazard. Consequently, the appellate court denied the plaintiffs' motion for renewal and reargument, thus effectively granting the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim. Furthermore, the third-party defendant Walcat Plumbing and Heating Corp.'s motion to vacate an order of default was affirmed.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentAppealLabor Law § 240 (1)Elevation-Related HazardDefault JudgmentVacate DefaultProcedural LawNew York LawAppellate Division
References
4
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02008 [237 AD3d 429]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2025

Hartrum v. Montefiore Hosp. Hous. Section II Inc.

Plaintiff Kyle Hartrum, an employee of Electronic Service Solutions, Inc. (ESS), sustained severe arm lacerations while removing communications equipment from a building roof owned by Montefiore Hospital Housing Section II Inc. The accident occurred when a piece of sheet metal being hand-hoisted swung and struck him. The Appellate Division modified the lower court's decision, granting Hartrum summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Monte Housing, SBA Site Management, LLC, Flo TV Incorporated, and KMB Design Group, LLC. The court also dismissed Hartrum's Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims against all defendants and granted several contractual indemnity claims among the parties, including Montefiore, SBA, Flo, KMB, and ESS.

Labor Law § 240(1) LiabilitySafe Place to WorkSummary Judgment GrantContractual IndemnificationConstruction Site AccidentHoisting SafetyAppellate Division ReviewLessor/Sublessor LiabilityMeans and Methods of WorkNegligence Dismissal
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 3,860 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