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. 15-01392
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 24, 2018

Music Mix Mobile LLC v. Newman (In re Stage Presence, Inc.)

This adversary proceeding involves claims by Music Mix Mobile, LLC and other plaintiffs against Stage Presence, Inc. and its owner, Allen Newman. Plaintiffs alleged they were not paid for services provided for a benefit concert and sought to hold Mr. Newman personally liable for Stage Presence's debts under alter ego or piercing the corporate veil theories. The court analyzed whether Mr. Newman excessively dominated Stage Presence and if this was used to perpetrate fraud or injustice. The decision concluded that Stage Presence maintained its separate corporate identity in key financial and operational aspects, and Mr. Newman genuinely believed the concert's funding was legitimate. Consequently, the court dismissed the alter ego claims against Mr. Newman while allowing the underlying claims against Stage Presence.

Bankruptcy LawAlter Ego DoctrinePiercing the Corporate VeilCorporate LiabilityCreditor ClaimsDebtor-Creditor LawFraudulent MisrepresentationContractual ObligationsCorporate FormalitiesUndercapitalization
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Muscular Dystrophy Ass'n of America, Inc. v. Weyl

A nationally recognized voluntary health organization, dedicated to muscular dystrophy research and patient support, sought a temporary injunction against a competing organization, the National Foundation for Muscular Dystrophy, Inc., and an individual defendant. The individual, a former regional director of the plaintiff, was accused of copying and transferring the plaintiff's volunteer worker database to the defendant corporation. This action reportedly caused significant confusion among volunteers, many of whom unknowingly began soliciting for the defendant while believing they were still working for the plaintiff. The court found these actions detrimental to the public and the plaintiff's cause, leading to the granting of a temporary injunction during the litigation, with specific exceptions.

Temporary InjunctionUnfair CompetitionEmployee MisconductVolunteer RecordsData TransferNonprofit OrganizationsHealth ResearchPublic SolicitationMuscular DystrophyOrganizational Dispute
References
0
Case No. 8074/89
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Palazo

The defendant, charged with criminal possession of a controlled substance, moved to have her attorney present at her presentence interview with the Department of Probation. This request challenged the Department's Executive Policy and Procedure No. 20-2-83, which generally disallows counsel's presence during such interviews. The defendant argued the policy was unconstitutional and that exceptional circumstances, including her low education, non-English speaking status, emotional state, and spousal privilege concerns, warranted an exception. The court, presided over by Judge Norman George, denied the motion, upholding the constitutionality of the policy. The court reasoned that the presentence interview is a non-adversarial information-gathering stage and that New York's statutory scheme adequately ensures fundamental fairness without requiring counsel's presence at the interview itself, further concluding that no exceptional circumstances were demonstrated.

Criminal ProcedureRight to CounselPresentence InterviewDepartment of Probation PolicyConstitutional LawSixth AmendmentSentencing StageExceptional CircumstancesSpousal PrivilegeDue Process
References
18
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 07401
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2021

Matter of Carola B.-M. v. New York State Off. of Temporary & Disability Assistance

Petitioners Carola B.-M. and Tiara M. challenged the denial of their supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP) benefits by the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance and the Orleans County Department of Social Services. The benefits were denied because they were deemed ineligible college students. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed this determination, holding that participation in the Adult Career and Continuing Education Services, Vocational Rehabilitation program (ACCES-VR) qualifies as a Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program. This status exempts the students from certain SNAP eligibility requirements. The court found that the original determination was based on an unreasonable interpretation of relevant regulations, annulled the decision, granted the petition, and remitted the case for a calculation of retroactive benefits.

SNAP benefitscollege student eligibilityJob Training Partnership ActACCES-VRvocational rehabilitationCPLR article 78regulatory interpretationpublic assistancefood stampsAppellate Division
References
28
Case No. ADJ3250254 (ANA 0403409)
Regular
Jul 22, 2013

TROY SADOWSKI vs. CINCINNATI BENGALS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a WCJ's decision finding no California jurisdiction over a professional football player's claim. The player was hired and covered by Ohio workers' compensation, and his presence in California was temporary for work. This temporary presence, combined with Ohio's reciprocal extraterritorial provisions, exempted the parties from California's workers' compensation law per Labor Code section 3600.5(b). The Board relied on its en banc decision in *Carroll v. Cincinnati Bengals* which established these exemption criteria.

Subject Matter JurisdictionLabor Code Section 3600.5(b)Temporary Presence ExceptionExtraterritorial ProvisionsOhio Workers' Compensation LawCincinnati BengalsProfessional Football PlayerCumulative Industrial InjuryReconsiderationEn Banc Decision
References
3
Case No. ADJ4151507 (SFO 0487197)
Regular
Feb 02, 2020

Tracy Sullivan vs. Café Amsterdam, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the previous award, finding the applicant's burn injury did not qualify for the "severe burns" exception to the temporary disability indemnity limit under Labor Code section 4656(c)(3)(D). Consequently, temporary disability indemnity is limited to 104 weeks from the commencement of payments on August 10, 2004. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the applicant's psychiatric injury was compensable, meeting the "sudden and extraordinary" employment condition exception. Clerical errors in the original findings were also corrected.

ADJ4151507SFO 0487197Tracy SullivanCafé AmsterdamState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderWCJindustrial injurycervical spine
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Bruzzese v. Guardsman Elevator Co.

In 1994, the claimant sustained head, neck, and back injuries at work, leading to an award for permanent partial disability, which included a wage expectancy adjustment under Workers’ Compensation Law § 14 (5). Following back surgery in 1998, the case was reopened, and the claimant was found to be temporarily totally disabled. Benefits for this temporary total disability were calculated based on the claimant's average weekly wage at the time of injury, without applying the wage expectancy adjustment. The claimant appealed, arguing that since the permanent partial disability preceded the temporary total disability, the wage expectancy adjustment should also apply to the latter period. The court disagreed, affirming the Workers’ Compensation Board's decision, citing established case law that Workers’ Compensation Law § 14 (5) is applicable only to awards for permanent partial disability and not temporary disability.

Wage expectancyTemporary total disabilityPermanent partial disabilityWorkers' Compensation benefitsBack injuryAppellate reviewDisability calculationWorkers' Compensation BoardAverage weekly wage
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nigberg v. Bakery & Confectionery Workers of the International Union of America

This case addresses a motion for a temporary injunction. The court's decision was to deny the motion, but this denial was conditional. The defendants were required to bring the action to trial during the February term. Failure to do so would result in the temporary injunction motion being granted. The judges present for this decision included Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Kelby, and Young, JJ.

Temporary InjunctionConditional DenialMotion PracticeCourt OrderJudicial Panel
References
0
Case No. ADJ5010233
Regular
Sep 20, 2010

RICHARD MARQUEZ vs. O'BRYANT ELECTRICAL, INDEMNITY INSURANCE CO OF NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify the issue of credit for time worked on temporary disability indemnity. While denying removal, the Board affirmed the original award of temporary disability through June 26, 2008, deferring the credit calculation. The Board adopted the Arbitrator's reasoning, except for the recommendation to grant removal. The matter is returned for further proceedings to clarify the credit issue, with temporary disability payments to continue unaffected by this deferral.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderArbitratorStipulationsIndustrial InjuryRight KneeTemporary DisabilityPermanent Disability
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kaynard v. Metallic Lathers & Reinforced Concrete Steel Workers Union

The acting regional director of the National Labor Relations Board sought a temporary injunction against Local 46, Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO. The NLRB alleged the union unlawfully picketed Prefabricated Concrete, Inc., to compel the assignment of metal work to its members rather than to employees represented by a certified union, Local 3127. Despite the union's claim of informational picketing regarding wages, the court found reasonable cause that the picketing's true object was an unlawful work assignment dispute under the National Labor Relations Act. The picketing severely disrupted concrete deliveries to Prefabricated. The petition for the temporary injunction was granted, restraining the union from picketing during business hours.

Labor DisputeUnfair Labor PracticeWork Assignment DisputePicketingTemporary InjunctionNational Labor Relations ActSecondary BoycottUnion CertificationCollective BargainingPrevailing Wage
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 2,920 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