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

Surgicare Surgical v. National Interstate Insurance

This case addresses whether an insurer complies with New York's 11 NYCRR 68.6 regulation by reimbursing for out-of-state medical services according to the host state's (New Jersey's) no-fault fee schedule. Plaintiff Surgicare Surgical, assignee of an injured party, sought full payment for surgery performed in New Jersey, but defendant National Interstate Insurance Company paid a reduced amount based on New Jersey's fee schedule. The court affirmed the defendant's method, ruling that when medical services are rendered in another jurisdiction with its own fee schedule, the 'permissible' charge under that schedule constitutes the 'prevailing fee' under New York's regulation. The decision emphasized alignment with legislative intent to contain no-fault insurance costs and reduce judicial burden, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint and denying its cross-motion.

No-Fault BenefitsInsurance LawFee Schedule DisputeOut-of-State Medical ServicesNew York RegulationsNew Jersey Fee ScheduleStatutory InterpretationAutomobile AccidentReimbursement DisputeSummary Judgment
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

NYSA-ILA Medical & Clinical Services Fund Ex Rel. Capo v. Catucci

The NYSA-ILA Medical & Clinical Services Fund, an employee medical services fund, sued Sabato Catucci and his three sons for allegedly withholding payments from Saleo Trucking Corporation to the fund. This action followed a prior judgment against the corporation for delinquent contributions. The plaintiff sought to hold the defendants personally liable under alter ego, breach of ERISA fiduciary duty, and embezzlement theories. The court granted summary judgment to the plaintiff on the breach of ERISA fiduciary duty claim against Sabato Catucci, finding him to be a fiduciary who misused plan assets. However, claims against his sons were dismissed due to lack of sufficient control over the corporation. The alter ego claim against Sabato Catucci will proceed to trial, and the embezzlement claim was dismissed for not supporting a private civil cause of action.

ERISA Fiduciary DutyAlter Ego LiabilityCorporate Veil PiercingDelinquent ContributionsSummary JudgmentEmployee Benefit PlanMultiemployer FundSelf-DealingCorporate ControlLabor Law
References
32
Case No. SBR 0332538
Regular
Mar 28, 2009

RUBY JONES vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA / DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, PREMIER OUTPATIENT SURGERY CENTER, INC.

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the case for further proceedings on the reasonableness of Premier Outpatient Surgery Center's (POSC) $\$16,578.00$ lien claim for surgical services. While POSC was properly licensed as a surgical clinic and did not require a fictitious-name permit, the Appeals Board found the record insufficient to establish the reasonableness of the charged fee, noting a significant disparity between the billed amount and what was paid based on Medicare rates. The Board also rescinded the award of attorney's fees to POSC's counsel, finding no basis for such an award under Labor Code sections 5811 or 5813.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRuby JonesState Compensation Insurance FundPremier Outpatient Surgery Centerfictitious-name permitMedical Board of CaliforniaDepartment of Health Servicessurgical clinic licenseoutpatient settingreasonable fee
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 29, 1996

Ray v. County of Delaware

The plaintiff sued Delaware County Mental Health Clinic for negligence, alleging failure to properly hire and supervise employee Brian Hart, a social worker who engaged in a sexual relationship with the plaintiff. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing proper procedures, lack of foreseeability, and plaintiff's culpable conduct. The Supreme Court granted the motion, determining the plaintiff failed to provide credible evidence for recovery. The appellate court affirmed this decision, finding that the plaintiff did not present affirmative proof to establish genuine issues of fact regarding the defendants' negligence in hiring and supervising their employee.

NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppealSupervisionEmployee MisconductSocial WorkerMental Health ClinicForeseeabilityEthical ConductProximate Cause
References
4
Case No. ADJ7962227
Regular
May 09, 2014

ANDREA REYNOSO vs. SANSUM CLINIC, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the initial finding that she did not sustain a cumulative injury during her employment. The applicant claimed new evidence, including EMG testing for wrist issues and diagnoses of pulmonary embolism and blood clots affecting her psyche, should have been considered. However, the Board found this evidence was not "newly discovered" and could have been discovered through due diligence prior to the settlement conference or trial. Even if admitted, the new evidence would not alter the conclusion that any industrial injury occurred in 1999, not during her employment with Sansum Clinic.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative InjuryAgreed Medical EvaluatorPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderAOE/COECarpal Tunnel SyndromePulmonary EmbolismPsyche InjuryNew Evidence
References
1
Case No. ADJ261234 (GOL 0093065) ADJ1281382 (GOL 0093064)
Regular
May 02, 2016

RITA ROBINSON vs. SANSUM SANTA BARBARA MEDICAL FOUNDATION CLINIC, DYNAMIC CLAIMS, Arrowpoint, GOLETA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case concerns an employer's (Sansum Santa Barbara Medical Foundation Clinic/Arrowood) petition for reconsideration of a prior award. The Appeals Board affirmed the award, which mandated right hip surgery and the provision of a Nurse Case Manager (NCM), finding Arrowood responsible for both. Arrowood's arguments regarding due process and utilization review were rejected, and the Board found that prior orders compelled NCM provision, which Arrowood had unilaterally ceased without sufficient medical evidence. The Board also admonished Arrowood's counsel for unprofessional conduct and misrepresentation of facts.

WCABReconsiderationNurse Case ManagerUtilization ReviewAgreed Medical ExaminerPrimary Treating PhysicianMedical Provider NetworkJoint and Several LiabilityMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to Proceed
References
5
Case No. LA0 0866858
Regular
Feb 04, 2008

JESUS LEON vs. EDWARD SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision that denied a lien claim by SB Surgery Center. The WCAB found that SB Surgery Center was properly licensed by the Department of Health Services as a "surgical clinic" and did not require a fictitious-name permit from the Medical Board. The case was returned to the trial level to determine the reasonableness of the facility fee.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantSB Surgery CenterEdward ServicesState Compensation Insurance FundLA0 0866858Findings and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeLicensed
References
4
Case No. AHM 0084758
Regular
Mar 06, 2008

STEVEN POOL vs. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior decision disallowing S&B Surgery Center's lien in its entirety, and returned the case for further proceedings. The WCJ improperly raised and decided issues not identified for trial, specifically regarding Labor Code section 139.3. The Appeals Board found SB possessed a valid surgical clinic license and remanded to determine the true name of SB, its licensure, and the reasonableness of its lien claim.

Lien claimantReconsiderationFindings and OrdersLabor Code section 139.3LicensureSurgical clinicDepartment of Health ServicesReasonable chargesFictitious business name statementOutpatient setting
References
34
Case No. LAO 0878674
Regular
Mar 06, 2008

KARLA BUENO vs. PLAZA DEFENDANT LA RAZA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision that barred a lien claim due to the alleged lack of a fictitious business name permit. The WCAB found that while the lien claimant presented a surgical clinic license, the record was unclear about its actual business name and compliance with fictitious name filing requirements. The case is remanded for further proceedings to determine the lien claimant's true name and establish its compliance with fictitious business name laws.

Fictitious Business Name StatementSurgical Clinic LicenseHealth ServicesBusiness and Professions CodeMedical BoardLien ClaimantOutpatient SettingAdministrative Law JudgeReconsiderationReasonableness of Fees
References
14
Case No. RIV 047525
Regular
Jan 31, 2008

THERESA CASTELLO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA / DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a lien claim for facility services provided by Premier Outpatient Surgery Center. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded the prior ruling disallowing the lien, finding Premier was properly licensed as a "surgical clinic" by the Department of Health Services and thus not required to possess a fictitious-name permit from the Medical Board. The case is remanded for further proceedings to determine the reasonableness of Premier's billed amount and whether Premier rendered professional services requiring separate licensure.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPremier Outpatient Surgery Centerlien claimantfictitious name permitMedical Board of Californiasurgical clinic licenseDepartment of Health Servicesoutpatient settingfacility feelicensure
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 257 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