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. ADJ2897160
Regular
Dec 13, 2010

JAMES HUTCHRAFT vs. PAN MOTORCYCLES, INC., UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS GROUP

In this workers' compensation case, James Hutchcraft sought penalties and attorney's fees for alleged unreasonable delays in authorizing a surgical consultation and cervical surgery. The Appeals Board denied his petition for reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's decision. The Board found that Hutchcraft failed to meet his burden of proving any delay by the defendant in authorizing the consultation or the surgery. Lacking evidence of a delay, the issue of reasonableness was not reached.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Sections 58145814.5Unreasonable DelayAuthorizationOrthopedic SurgeonCervical SurgeryBurden of ProofMedical Treatment
References
2
Case No. ADJ3765992 (SRO 0132531)
Regular
Apr 06, 2011

LORRAINE O'KEEFE vs. SURGICAL STAFF NORTH, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, BROADSPIRE SERVICES for CAL COMP, COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF MONTEREY PENINSULA, CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration on Community Hospital of Monterey Peninsula's (CHOMP) petition regarding a penalty assessed for delayed payment to CIGA. The WCAB amended the prior order, ruling that CHOMP is not liable for a Labor Code section 5814 penalty because this section applies only to delays in payments to injured workers, not to reimbursements between defendants. However, the WCAB affirmed the prior finding that CHOMP engaged in bad-faith litigation tactics, upholding sanctions under Labor Code section 5813. The final order also clarified the amount owed to CIGA and affirmed the attorney's fees awarded to the applicant's counsel.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardSurgical Staff NorthCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCommunity Hospital of Monterey PeninsulaUnreasonable DelayBad Faith LitigationLabor Code Section 5814Labor Code Section 5813Labor Code Section 4064(c)Permanent Disability
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 16, 2013

Claim of Ercole v. New York State Police

The case involves a claimant who suffered knee injuries in 1996, with the case closed in 2000. When the claimant's condition worsened in 2011, an orthopedic surgeon requested a bilateral total knee replacement. The workers' compensation carrier failed to respond, leading to the Chair of the Workers' Compensation Board authorizing the surgery. Subsequently, the carrier sought to shift liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge shifted liability to the Special Fund but held the carrier responsible for surgical costs due to its delay. The Board, however, determined the Special Fund was liable for the surgical expenses, overruling prior precedent. The Special Fund appealed this decision. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that once liability shifts to the Special Fund, the carrier has no further interest in the payment of the claim, and the statute does not permit holding the carrier liable for expenses incurred after the shift.

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial FundLiability ShiftMedical AuthorizationKnee SurgeryCarrier Non-responseBoard Precedent OverrulingStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewStale Claims
References
13
Case No. ADJ6973825
Regular
May 21, 2012

MONICA BENARD vs. JENNY CRAIG, SEDGWICK CMS

This case concerns a penalty imposed on Jenny Craig for unreasonably delaying authorization for applicant Monica Benard's chiropractic treatment. The WCJ found a 25% penalty for the delay, which Jenny Craig appealed, arguing the delay was due to the applicant's choice of a chiropractor outside their Medical Provider Network (MPN). The Appeals Board affirmed the unreasonable delay finding but reduced the penalty to 20% of the delayed treatment's value, citing a failure in case management rather than intentional disregard. Jurisdiction was reserved for the parties to adjust the penalty amount.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardMonica BenardJenny CraigSedgwick CMSADJ6973825ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code section 5814Medical Provider Network (MPN)chiropractic treatment
References
9
Case No. ADJ9932467
Regular
Oct 16, 2017

THERESA MCFARLAND vs. REDLANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied an applicant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision that "Return-To-Work" supplemental payments under Labor Code section 139.48 are not "compensation" as defined by Labor Code section 3207. Therefore, the applicant was not entitled to a second penalty under Labor Code section 5814 for the employer's delay in providing a Supplemental Job Displacement Benefit voucher, as that delay did not cause a delay in a compensable benefit. The Board found that the applicant's penalty claim for the voucher delay was already resolved and that imposing a second penalty for a non-compensable benefit delay would be unfair and against the principle of balancing justice.

Labor Code section 139.48Return-To-Work supplemental paymentscompensation definitionLabor Code section 3207Labor Code section 5814 penaltyLabor Code section 4658.7 voucherSupplemental Job Displacement Benefitcompromise and release agreementGage v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.unreasonable delay
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Blau Mechanical Corp. v. City of New York

This appeal addresses whether contractual delays, for which the plaintiff-respondent sought monetary damages for plumbing work at the New York Zoological Park, were contemplated by the parties' agreement. The court concluded that these delays were indeed contemplated, reversing a prior Supreme Court finding. The contract included a clause barring damages for delay unless caused by intentional wrongdoing, gross negligence, or willful misconduct. The plaintiff alleged delays due to structural changes, unexpected subsurface conditions, and interference from a local community group. However, the court found that the contract explicitly anticipated changes and differing subsurface conditions. Additionally, delays from community group intrusion were not attributable to the City as grossly negligent or intentional, thereby precluding recovery for damages.

Contractual DelaysDamages for DelayContemplated DelaysConstruction ContractPlumbing WorkNew York CityAppellate ReviewSubsurface ConditionsChange OrdersCommunity Interference
References
4
Case No. ADJ6674207
Regular
Sep 08, 2015

Francisco Martinez vs. RLS Plastering, Seabright Insurance Company

This case involves lien claimants Frontline Medical Associates and South Bay Surgical Spine whose liens were disallowed by the WCJ due to a failure to present evidence at trial. While the Appeals Board denied the petition to disqualify the judge and dismissed the petition for removal, they granted reconsideration on the sanctions. Ultimately, the Appeals Board affirmed the disallowance of the liens but rescinded the sanctions, finding the actions were not a willful intent to delay proceedings.

Labor Code section 4903.5Petition for disqualificationPetition for removalPetition for reconsiderationSanctionsBad faith conductLien claimsCompromise and releaseIndustrial injuryStatute of limitations
References
24
Case No. ADJ2798585 (MON 0241152) ADJ2723676 (MON 0241153)
Regular
Sep 21, 2011

MAXINE WIGGS vs. ALLIED SIGNAL AEROSPACE, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by the defendant challenging the setting of a status conference based on an allegedly improper Declaration of Readiness to Proceed to Expedited Hearing. The defendant argued the expedited hearing was requested for unauthorized surgery, which was a violation of policy. However, the defendant later conceded the surgical consult had been authorized, rendering their petition moot. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition as moot and also noted an unacceptable delay in scanning case documents into EAMS.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalDeclaration of Readiness to Proceed to Expedited HearingPresiding Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeStatus ConferenceExpedited HearingMedical TreatmentSurgical ConsultMoot PetitionEAMS
References
1
Case No. SBA 0076630
Regular
Mar 03, 2008

Janice Brackenridge-DeGraff vs. ACTMEDIA, INC., INTERCARE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, overturning a prior decision that denied penalties for delayed payment. The Board found the employer unreasonably delayed payment of the compromise and release agreement by 10 days beyond the agreed-upon 30-day deadline. Consequently, the Board awarded a 5% penalty on the delayed amount and a separate 5% penalty for the unreasonable delay in paying the legally owed interest.

Labor Code section 5814ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleasePenaltyUnreasonable DelayPaymentInterestAttorney's FeesCIGAWCJ
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 1,405 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