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. ADJ3010489 (SAL 0105858)
Regular
Oct 27, 2017

MICHAEL MAYO vs. SUNRISE MUSHROOMS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an appeal by Sunrise Mushrooms, Inc. and its insurer regarding an award of permanent total disability to Michael Mayo for injuries sustained in 2001. The defendants argued that the medical evidence relied upon by the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) was insufficient, particularly regarding the impact of a functional restoration program and the apportionment of disability. The Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's findings. The Board found that the medical evidence supported the applicant's permanent total disability, that apportionment was properly handled, and that even with the use of the Multiple Disabilities Table, the applicant's rating remained 100%.

Permanent Total DisabilityApportionmentFunctional Restoration ProgramSubstantial Medical EvidenceMultiple Disabilities TableWCJPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryNeck DisabilityLumbar Spine Disability
References
0
Case No. 18-343/344
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 20, 2018

Sunrise Acupuncture PC v. Global Liberty Ins. Co. of N.Y.

The Appellate Term, First Department, affirmed the judgments of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County. The defendant-insurer, Global Liberty Insurance Company of New York, had appealed two judgments rendered after a consolidated nonjury trial, which were in favor of the plaintiff, Sunrise Acupuncture PC a/a/o Luis Suero. The appellate court concluded that the trial court appropriately denied the defendant's belated attempt to invoke the primary jurisdiction of the Workers' Compensation Board. Despite raising the workers' compensation statute as an affirmative defense nearly seven years prior, the defendant only actively pursued this issue at trial, which was deemed an untimely maneuver. The court held that the defendant could not, at such a late stage, use the primary jurisdiction argument to further delay the ongoing litigation.

No-Fault InsuranceWorkers' Compensation BoardPrimary Jurisdiction DoctrineAppellate ReviewTimeliness of DefenseAffirmative DefensesProcedural LawInsurance LitigationPanel DecisionMedical Claims
References
3
Case No. SAL 099919
Regular
Oct 01, 2007

JOSE SANCHEZ vs. SUNRISE MUSHROOM, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior Appeals Board decision that rescinded a judge's award. The Board dismissed the petition because it was not timely filed, as it was received by the Board one day after the 25-day deadline. Even if timely, the Board would have denied it on the merits as the defendant failed to prove the applicant unreasonably refused medical treatment.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code 5903Jurisdictional Time LimitRefusal of Medical TreatmentArthroscopic SurgeryPermanent DisabilityBurden of ProofTyler v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Industrial Injury
References
9
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00169 [168 AD3d 1199]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 10, 2019

Matter of Villagra v. Sunrise Senior Living Mgt.

Claimant Rosalind M. Villagra sought workers' compensation benefits after an injury sustained at work. Her claim was initially disallowed by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) due to a lack of prima facie medical evidence. Subsequently, claimant filed an application for Board review, requesting a rehearing or reopening of her claim, arguing the WCLJ's decision was inconsistent. The Workers' Compensation Board denied her application, deeming it an untimely appeal from the WCLJ's decision. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board applied an incorrect statutory framework and should have evaluated the application as one for rehearing or reopening.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsTimeliness of AppealApplication for RehearingReopening of ClaimPrima Facie Medical EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Law Judge DecisionAppellate ReviewStatutory FrameworkProcedural ErrorRemittal to Board
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sunrise Undergarment v. UNDERGARMENT, ETC., L. 62

Petitioner Sunrise Undergarment Co. sought to stay arbitration proceedings initiated by respondent Undergarment & Negligee Workers’ Union Local 62, I.L.G.W.U. The Union moved for summary judgment denying the Employer's petition. The central issue was the Employer's attempt to withdraw from a multi-employer bargaining unit after collective bargaining negotiations had commenced. The Court applied the established rule that withdrawal is not permitted once negotiations begin, absent consent or 'unusual circumstances.' Finding no such exceptions, the Court ruled the Employer's withdrawal ineffective. Additionally, claims of arbitrator bias and non-compliance with pre-arbitration procedures were deemed premature or issues for the arbitrator. Consequently, the Union's motion for summary judgment was granted, and the Employer's petition to stay arbitration was denied.

Labor LawArbitration StayCollective Bargaining AgreementMulti-employer Bargaining UnitUntimely WithdrawalSummary JudgmentNational Labor Relations Board RuleArbitrator BiasPre-arbitration ProceduresUnion Funds
References
26
Case No. ADJ6729351
Regular
Jul 06, 2012

TERESA MALDONADO vs. SUNRISE SENIOR LIVING, SEDGWICK CMS

This case, *Maldonado v. Sunrise Senior Living*, involved an applicant seeking reconsideration of a prior decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB reviewed the petition for reconsideration and the administrative law judge's report. Finding no grounds to overturn the initial decision, the WCAB formally denied the petition for reconsideration. The order adopting the judge's reasoning implies the original ruling was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSunrise Senior LivingSedgwick CMSADJ6729351Long Beach District OfficeDenying ReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law Judge ReportRecord ReviewAdopt and Incorporate
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Frangella Mushroom Farms, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

The petitioner, who operates a mushroom growing farm in the Town of Coeymans, sought a special use permit to construct an apartment building for its migrant laborers. The Zoning Board of Appeals denied the application, citing concerns related to aesthetic harmony, property values, safety, and traffic. However, the court found the Board's 17 specific findings to be arbitrary and capricious, lacking sufficient evidence in the record. The court determined that the proposed housing would not adversely affect the district and would replace existing substandard dwellings without increasing population or traffic. Consequently, the court annulled the Board's determination and mandated the issuance of the special use permit.

Zoning OrdinanceSpecial Use PermitArbitrary and CapriciousLand Use PlanningMigrant HousingAgricultural OperationsJudicial ReviewCPLR Article 78Town of CoeymansAlbany County
References
6
Case No. ADJ3717786 (SAL 0117743)
Regular
May 14, 2013

ANGELINA CARRILLO vs. MONTEREY MUSHROOMS, INC., ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves Angelina Carrillo's workers' compensation claim against Monterey Mushrooms, Inc. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of the initial decision. The WCAB affirmed the prior decision but amended Finding of Fact #3 and Award (A) to reflect a permanent partial disability rating of 32%. This resulted in an award of $33,350 in permanent disability indemnity, payable over 145 weeks, after adjustments and attorney fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration GrantedPermanent Partial DisabilityApportionmentPermanent Disability IndemnityEDD LienAttorney FeesVictor RedulaMonterey MushroomsAcclamation Insurance Management Services
References
0
Case No. ADJ10306372
Regular
Mar 16, 2020

RITA GARCIA vs. SUNRISE GROWERS FROZSUN FOODS, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST GROUP

This case involves a dispute over payment for medical-legal photocopy services provided to applicant Rita Garcia. The defendant, Sunrise Growers Frozsun Foods, argued the services were not valid medical-legal expenses as there was no contested claim, and they had objected to duplicative record requests. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the original decision, limiting the cost petitioner's recovery to the principal amount of $689.85, plus a 10% penalty and 7% interest. However, the WCAB deferred the issue of attorney's fees and sanctions, requiring further development of the record to determine if defendant's conduct constituted bad faith.

WCABReconsiderationMedical-legal expensesLabor Code section 4622PenaltyInterestAttorney's feesSanctionsWCAB Rule 10451.1WCAB Rule 10561
References
1
Case No. ADJ7745775
Regular
Jun 16, 2015

ENRIQUE CASTANEDA vs. MONTEREY MUSHROOMS, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION For SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the February 4, 2014 Findings of Fact and awarded further medical treatment for applicant Enrique Castaneda against Monterey Mushrooms, Inc. The WCAB also imposed sanctions of $500.00 against defense counsel Peter R. Nelson and his firm, jointly and severally, for intemperate language used during advocacy. Defense counsel's objection and apology were considered, leading to a reduced sanction amount. The sanctions were justified by the board's need to address the counsel's inappropriate language, which diverted resources.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSanctionsIntemperate languageHeat of advocacyDefense counselPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactFurther medical treatmentAward
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 33 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