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. ADJ1936318
Regular
Jun 17, 2013

JUAN RIVERA vs. MORROW CABLE, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision. The ALJ recommended dismissal or denial of the petition due to improper verification by the defendant's attorney. The central issue was the necessity and reasonableness of a $165 lien for an interpreter to translate a Compromise and Release document for a Spanish-speaking applicant. The ALJ found such interpretation reasonable and necessary to protect both parties, rejecting the defendant's argument that the applicant's attorney speaking Spanish negated this need.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationWCJUnverified PetitionLabor Code Section 5902CCP 446VerificationDismissalLienLogos Language
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 12, 1998

Quispe v. Lemle & Wolff, Inc.

The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed a lower court's denial of the defendants' motion for a new trial on liability. The central issue on appeal was the trial court's refusal to admit a hospital triage report into evidence. The report contained conflicting accounts of how the plaintiff sustained injuries, specifically whether she fell from a fire escape or jumped from a window to escape a fire, both from a height of eight feet. The court found the report inadmissible under both the business entry exception to the hearsay rule and as an admission against interest. This was due to the defendants' failure to prove that the plaintiff was the direct source of the recorded information, as the plaintiff spoke only Spanish and the nurse relied on unidentified EMS workers and a hospital translator. Furthermore, the court noted that the cause of the injury was not pertinent to the plaintiff's diagnosis or treatment, which further precluded its admission under the business records exception. The defendants' argument that the translator acted as the plaintiff's agent was also rejected as lacking factual support.

Hearsay RuleBusiness Entry ExceptionAdmission Against InterestHospital Triage ReportMedical Records AdmissibilityTranslation AccuracyInterpreter CompetencyCause of InjuryNew Trial MotionAppellate Review
References
3
Case No. ADJ9072448
Regular
Aug 24, 2015

SANDRA HERNANDEZ vs. INN OF SPANISH GARDENS, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendant, Inn of Spanish Gardens and its insurer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted this petition. The Board needs more time to thoroughly review the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. Further proceedings may be held to address the petition.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationSTATUTORY TIME CONSTRAINTSFACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUESJUST AND REASONED DECISIONFURTHER PROCEEDINGSOFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONERSELECTRONIC ADJUDICATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMEAMS
References
0
Case No. ADJ3608808
Regular
Feb 11, 2009

JUAN MARTINEZ vs. J.R. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB granted reconsideration to allow the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) to provide a supplemental report addressing the applicant's petition, which had been translated from Spanish. After reviewing the reports, the WCAB affirmed the original Findings and Award. The matter is now concluded with the affirmation of the prior decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardSupplemental ReportPetition for ReconsiderationWCJAffirmDefendantApplicantState Compensation Insurance Fund
References
0
Case No. Nos. 27-29
Regular Panel Decision
May 06, 2021

The People v. Kenneth Slade , The People v. Kieth Brooks, The People v. Charo N. Allen

This opinion addresses three appeals consolidated to determine the facial sufficiency of accusatory instruments when a translator assists witnesses with limited-English proficiency. Justice Garcia, writing for the majority of the New York Court of Appeals, affirmed in one case and reversed in two, generally holding that an accusatory instrument is facially sufficient even if a translator was used, as long as it does not facially indicate a defect or misinterpretation. The Court found that a translator acts as a language conduit and does not create an additional layer of hearsay for pleading purposes, and that the CPL does not mandate a certificate of translation. Dissenting opinions by Justices Rivera and Wilson argued for clearer rules requiring documentation of translator qualifications and accuracy to ensure the reliability and non-hearsay nature of such instruments, emphasizing the importance of these procedural safeguards, especially given the high rate of plea bargains in misdemeanor cases.

Accusatory Instrument SufficiencyLimited English ProficiencyTranslator RoleHearsay RuleSpeedy Trial MotionFacial SufficiencyMisdemeanor ComplaintsSupporting DepositionsCriminal Procedure LawCPL 30.30
References
48
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dilonez v. Fox Linen Service Inc.

Plaintiffs Angel Dilonez and others initiated an action against Fox Linen Service, Inc. and its owner George Sundel, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York labor laws for failing to pay overtime wages. Plaintiffs sought conditional certification of a collective action, which defendants opposed on several grounds, including the validity of declarations and the scope of the proposed class and notification. The United States Magistrate Judge Gary R. Brown granted the motion for conditional certification, finding that plaintiffs met the 'modest factual showing' required to demonstrate a common policy or plan violating the law. The court also issued detailed directives regarding the notification process, including a six-year statute of limitations for state claims, approval for Spanish translation, and posting of the notice at the defendants' workplace. The decision addressed the contents of the notice, disallowing language that might unduly discourage opt-in plaintiffs, and clarified the procedure for returning consent forms to plaintiffs' counsel.

Fair Labor Standards ActFLSANew York Labor LawOvertime WagesCollective ActionConditional CertificationWage and Hour DisputeEmployment LawClass Action NoticePlaintiff's Motion Granted
References
38
Case No. ADJ779198 (SJO 0267719)
Regular
Nov 19, 2010

EVELIN GARCIA vs. SERVICE PERFORMANCE CORPORATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB granted reconsideration and reversed a prior award for interpreting services, finding the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof. The claimant did not demonstrate the interpreting services were reasonable, necessary, or provided by qualified interpreters. Crucially, the medical provider's office advertised Spanish-speaking staff, and the doctor himself spoke Spanish, negating the necessity for external interpretation services. Therefore, the lien for interpreter fees was disallowed.

WCABReconsiderationLien ClaimantInterpreting ServicesQualified InterpreterReasonablenessNecessityBurden of ProofLabor Code Section 4600Labor Code Section 5811
References
5
Case No. ADJ10024436
Regular
May 13, 2019

JUAN FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ vs. CITI STAFF SOLUTIONS, INC., OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision, finding potential issues with the adequacy of the primary treating physician's medical reports. Specifically, the Board noted that the applicant required a Spanish interpreter for other evaluations and at trial, yet the physician's reports did not mention an interpreter or his own Spanish proficiency. Consequently, the Board rescinded the previous award and remanded the case for further proceedings to clarify these issues regarding the physician's evaluation and communication with the applicant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPrimary Treating PhysicianQualified Medical EvaluatorSpanish Language InterpreterMedical HistorySubstantial EvidenceInadequate Medical HistoryRescind
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Yovanny L.

This case addresses the accuracy of court interpreter translations in a juvenile delinquency proceeding. The Assistant Corporation Counsel moved to strike the complainant's testimony, alleging significant errors by the court-appointed Mandarin interpreter. After conducting a hearing and considering testimony from both the Assistant Corporation Counsel and the interpreter, the court acknowledged that some minor errors in translation and interpreter conduct occurred. However, the court ultimately found these errors to be isolated instances and not sufficiently serious or pervasive to cause major prejudice to any party. Consequently, the drastic remedy of striking the testimony and starting anew was denied, and the trial was ordered to resume with a different Mandarin interpreter.

Juvenile DelinquencyCourt InterpretersTranslation AccuracyDue Process RightsEvidentiary MotionTestimony AdmissibilityMandarin LanguageFamily Court ProcedureJudicial ReviewProcedural Errors
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lopez v. Flight Services & Systems, Inc.

This is an action alleging employment discrimination and retaliation by former employees Jose Lopez, Richard Colon, and James Cromer against Flight Services & Systems, Inc. and supervisor Todd Dunmyer. Plaintiffs claimed discrimination based on national origin and race, and retaliation under Title VII, NYHRL, and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment on some claims, including Lopez’s and Colon’s Title VII claims and Colon’s no-Spanish claim, but denied it for others, such as Lopez’s no-Spanish claim, Colon’s unequal working conditions claim, and all retaliation and failure to promote claims. The decision highlights triable issues of fact regarding discriminatory animus and working conditions.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationNational Origin DiscriminationRace DiscriminationTitle VIINew York Human Rights Law42 U.S.C. § 1981Summary JudgmentNo-Spanish PolicyUnequal Working Conditions
References
42
Showing 1-10 of 66 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