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

Grimmer v. Lord Day & Lord

This case is a class action brought under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act) by former employees of the law firm Lord Day & Lord, Barrett Smith. The employees alleged that the firm violated the WARN Act by closing its offices without providing the required sixty days' advance notice. Lord Day asserted statutory exceptions, specifically the 'faltering company' and 'unforeseeable business circumstances' exceptions, as affirmative defenses. Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment, contending that Lord Day's notice was insufficient as it merely recited the language of a statutory exception without providing a 'brief statement of the basis' for reducing the notice period. The court agreed with the plaintiffs, ruling that simply citing a statutory exception is inadequate and that specific factual basis is required, thus granting the motion and striking Lord Day's affirmative defenses.

WARN Actplant closingmass layoffnotice periodunforeseeable business circumstancesfaltering company exceptionaffirmative defensessummary judgmentstatutory interpretationemployee rights
References
2
Case No. ADJ809010 (LAO 0877737)
Regular
Feb 28, 2012

Jessica Leaser vs. Washington Mutual, Zurich North America, SRS/SEDGWICK Claims Management Services

The Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed three days after the statutory deadline. Although the administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a notice of intent to sanction the lien claimant for proceeding to trial without a legal basis, the Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the sanctions, finding the WCJ's assessment of "no factual or legal basis" unsupported on the current record, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionJurisdictional Time LimitsRemoval on Board MotionMonetary SanctionsNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsRescinded SanctionsLien ClaimantClaims Administrator
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re New York City Off-Track Betting Corp.

Finger Lakes Racing Association and Empire Resorts, Inc. moved to compel New York City Off-Track Betting Corporation (OTB) to pay post-petition statutory distributions under the New York Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law, arguing they were mandated and qualified as administrative expenses. The Court denied administrative expense status, reasoning that no "estate" exists in Chapter 9 cases to incur such expenses. Citing ambiguity in the state's Racing Law, paramount federalism concerns, and the regulatory authority of the New York State Racing and Wagering Board, the Court abstained from ruling on the specific payment schedule for these distributions. Consequently, the automatic stay was lifted, and the parties were ordered to seek a determination from the Racing and Wagering Board and engage in mediation to resolve the ongoing disputes regarding OTB's restructuring and statutory payments.

Bankruptcy CourtChapter 9 DebtorMunicipal LawState RegulationOff-Track BettingHorse Racing IndustryStatutory InterpretationJudicial AbstentionComity and FederalismAdministrative Claims
References
42
Case No. ADJ4471046 (STK 0208353)
Regular
Feb 03, 2017

SHARON PADRON vs. FRITO LAY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the original award due to concerns about exceeding statutory temporary disability limits and an unclear basis for the defendant's credit of $37,700.35. The WCAB found the award for temporary disability indemnity likely surpassed the 104-week statutory maximum under Labor Code section 4656(c)(1). Furthermore, the WCAB determined the credit calculation was not adequately supported by evidence, particularly regarding whether applicant contributed to disability plans and thus whether a proportional credit applied per *Fraide*. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify these issues and recalculate any permissible credit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardTemporary Disability IndemnityCreditShort-Term DisabilityLong-Term DisabilityLabor Code Section 3751(a)Cumulative Trauma InjuryBilateral Knees
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Saur v. M & M Transportation

The case involves an appeal regarding the actuarial computation of present value and interest payable to the Aggregate Trust Fund under the Workers' Compensation Law. The Workers' Compensation Board made several recomputations and assessments for interest against an employer and its insurance carrier. The insurer objected, disputing the basis for interest payments prior to a specific directive. The appellate court reviewed the Board's decision, particularly its determination of the present value computation date. The court ultimately found the Board's decision to be erroneous as a matter of law, lacking statutory or factual basis. Consequently, the court reversed the decision, awarded costs to the employer and insurance carrier, and remitted the matter back to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with its ruling.

Actuarial computationPresent valueAggregate Trust FundWorkers' Compensation LawInterest assessmentStatutory interpretationAppellate reviewRemittitur
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Maxwell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

This is an appeal concerning the award of counsel fees in a no-fault automobile accident case. The plaintiff appealed the Trial Term's decision denying an excess counsel fee award, which was initially granted at the statutory maximum. Plaintiff argued that the case involved novel issues related to an exclusion clause and the basis for disclaimer under No-Fault Law, warranting higher fees. The appellate court affirmed the Trial Term's decision, finding that the issues, while skillfully handled, were not sufficiently novel or unique to justify an excess fee under 11 NYCRR 65.16 (c) (8) (vii), as they relied on established contract law and statutory construction. The court also rejected the plaintiff's constitutional challenge regarding the impairment of contracts, clarifying that the fee limitation only applies to the insurer, not the client, and dismissed an ex parte communication claim as outside the record.

No-Fault BenefitsCounsel FeesExcess Fee AwardStatutory InterpretationContract Law PrinciplesConstitutional ChallengeImpairment ClauseAppellate DivisionInsurance RegulationsLegal Practice
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sara Lee Corp. v. Bags of New York, Inc.

Sara Lee Corporation filed an action claiming defendants produced and sold counterfeit trademarked Coach Leatherware products, violating the Trademark Act of 1946. Following defendants' failure to respond, a default judgment was entered, and the court retained jurisdiction to determine damages. Despite court orders, seizures, and civil contempt findings, defendant Nabil Helou and his associated businesses persisted in their counterfeiting activities. The court, noting the defendants' willful infringement, efforts to mislead, and defiance of deterrence, awarded Sara Lee $750,000 in statutory damages and $46,045.63 in attorney fees and costs.

Trademark InfringementCounterfeitingStatutory DamagesAttorney FeesWillful InfringementDefault JudgmentInjunctive ReliefDeterrencePunitive DamagesCivil Contempt
References
15
Case No. ADJ1700843 (LAO 0888764)
Regular
Sep 07, 2012

YANFEN SITU vs. SWEDA COMPANY, LLC, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely and lacking merit. The petition failed to meet statutory filing deadlines and did not properly serve defense counsel. Due to these procedural deficiencies and the petition's lack of legal basis, the WCAB is considering imposing sanctions of $250.00 on the lien claimant and its representative.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for reconsiderationDismissing petitionLabor Code section 5310Notice of intentionSanctionsSJT & AssociatesLilibeth GomezHearing representative
References
2
Case No. GRO 0033398
Regular
Jan 17, 2008

JOSEPH BERTAO vs. CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant seeking to challenge his permanent disability rating by obtaining expert testimony. The applicant requested defendants advance costs for this expert evaluation, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied this request. The WCAB found no statutory basis to order advancement of costs for future expert evaluation and could not determine if the anticipated evidence would be reasonable and necessary.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoseph BertaoCrystal Springs WaterState Compensation Insurance FundPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleReconsiderationAdvance CostsLabor Code Section 5811Costa v. Hardy DiagnosticAgreed Medical Evaluator
References
2
Case No. ADJ1826555 (ANA 0378724) ADJ3723648 (ANA 0377762) ADJ4674070 (ANA 0383912)
Regular
Mar 01, 2011

SANTIAGO RODRIGUEZ vs. SALVADOR VARGAS LANDSCAPE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND INSURED FRESNO

The Appeals Board granted the lien claimant's Petition for Removal, finding that the WCJ erred by ordering the matter off calendar due to non-reimbursement of a vacated award. There is no statutory basis to require reimbursement of a rescinded award as a prerequisite to trial, and the Appeals Board found such a requirement would violate constitutional policies of substantial justice. The case is returned to the trial level for proceedings on the lien claimant's lien.

Petition for RemovalOrder Vacating Findings and AwardDue ProcessReimbursementRescinded AwardCompromise and ReleaseIndustrial InjuryWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantState Compensation Insurance Fund
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 3,081 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