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

District 2 Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass'n v. Puerto Rico Marine Management, Inc.

District 2, a marine engineers union, sued Puerto Rico Marine Management, Inc. (PRMMI) to compel arbitration after PRMMI terminated their collective bargaining agreement and discharged union members. PRMMI argued the agreement was terminable at will, while District 2 maintained it was still in effect, terminable only by the union. The court found both interpretations unpersuasive, ruling the agreement's extension implied a reasonable period for good faith negotiations and required reasonable notice for termination. Therefore, the court denied both parties' motions for summary judgment and PRMMI's motion to dismiss, ordering a factual hearing to determine the effectiveness of the termination, while making accrued benefit claims immediately arbitrable.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementContract TerminationLabor DisputeSummary JudgmentSubject Matter JurisdictionUnionEmployerGood Faith NegotiationsReasonable Notice
References
6
Case No. ADJ10682518
Regular
Nov 30, 2017

LORENZO ENRIQUEZ vs. HOUSE FOODS AMERICA, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT

This case involves a Petition for Removal and Reconsideration filed by the defendant, House Foods America and Tokio Marine Management. The Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal, finding that the WCJ's finding of injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment was a final order, making reconsideration the proper remedy. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's findings and giving significant weight to their credibility determinations regarding the applicant's testimony.

RemovalReconsiderationPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10843Final OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueAOE/COECredibility Determination
References
5
Case No. VNO 395339
Regular
Aug 09, 2007

ARMANDO GUTIERREZ vs. TEMP STAR SERVICES, CAITAC, TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL, BROADSPIRE

This case involves a worker injured while employed by both a general employer (Temp Star) and a special employer (Caitac). The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA), responsible for the insolvent insurer of the general employer, sought dismissal, arguing the special employer's insurer (Tokio Marine) provided "other insurance." The Appeals Board found Tokio Marine's policy constituted "other insurance" under Insurance Code section 1063.1(c)(9) because there was insufficient evidence that it was not intended to cover special employees. Consequently, CIGA was dismissed as a defendant.

CIGATokio Marine ManagementSpecial employerGeneral employerCovered claimsOther insuranceInsurance Code Section 1063.1(c)(9)LiquidationJoint and several liabilityWorkers' compensation policy
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 19, 2001

District No. 1-PCD v. Apex Marine Ship Management Co.

This case concerns an appeal to vacate an arbitration award that dismissed a grievance filed by District No. 1-PCD, Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association (AFL-CIO) and Harry A. Kirmon. Kirmon, a discharged engineer, had his grievance dismissed by an arbitrator who found the Union failed to provide Kirmon's written statement to the Company, deeming it a procedural prerequisite. The Supreme Court upheld this dismissal. However, the appellate court reversed, ruling that the arbitrator's decision did not derive its essence from the collective bargaining agreement, which only required the statement be given to the Union. The court concluded the arbitrator exceeded his authority by basing the dismissal on procedural grounds not outlined in the CBA's limitations on his jurisdiction.

Labor ArbitrationCollective BargainingGrievance ProcedureArbitrator JurisdictionFederal Labor LawWrongful DischargeJudicial Review of ArbitrationUnion RightsEmployment TerminationContract Interpretation
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 12, 1984

Oga v. Loh

Kiyomi Oga, injured in a taxicab during employment, settled a tort action with the cab company for $60,000 without her workers' compensation carrier, Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance Company's, consent. Tokio denied future liability due to the lack of consent, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. Oga subsequently moved for a court order nunc pro tunc approving the settlement in lieu of Tokio's consent. The court considered the timeliness of the motion, finding the delay excusable, and the reasonableness of the settlement, supported by a physician's affidavit stating Oga's full recovery. The court granted Oga's motion, concluding the Board's decision was not res judicata on the court's ability to issue a nunc pro tunc order and that the settlement was reasonable, despite potential future liability for Tokio under the Workers' Compensation Law.

Workers' CompensationNo-Fault InsurancePersonal InjurySettlement ApprovalNunc Pro Tunc OrderCarrier ConsentThird-Party ActionDental ExpensesTimeliness of MotionRes Judicata
References
5
Case No. OAK 0267949
Regular
Jul 14, 2008

MARIO VALDEZ vs. ITO CARIANI SAUSAGO CO., TOKIO MARINE FIRE INSURANCE, RANDSTAD/ACCUSTAFF BY CIGA THROUGH ITS SERVICING FACILITY BROADSPIRE ON BEHALF OF LEGION INSURANCE IN LIQUIDATION

This case concerns an industrial injury sustained by an employee loaned from a general employer (Randstad/Accustaff) to a special employer (Ito Cariani Sausage Co.). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a finding that Tokio Marine and Fire Insurance, the special employer's carrier, was liable, despite the general employer's original insurer becoming insolvent. The Board found no evidence of a valid agreement under Labor Code § 3602(d) shifting responsibility to the general employer's insurer, and thus Tokio remained liable as "other insurance" available to the claimant.

Special employmentGeneral employerSpecial employerTokio Marine Fire InsuranceRandstad AccustaffLegion InsuranceCIGAInsurance Code section 11663Labor Code section 3602(d)Joint and several liability
References
16
Case No. LAO 0803921
Regular
Mar 26, 2008

Amelia Acosta vs. Alpine Electronics of America, Mitsui Sumitomo Marine Management, Tokio Marine Management, Inc.

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an order for attorney fees against the defendants. The Board found that the administrative law judge failed to provide the defendants with proper due process and that the circumstances warranted finding the imposition of sanctions unjust. Consequently, the petition for removal was dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationOrder for Attorney FeesWCJLien ClaimantCompromise & ReleaseIndustrial InjuryDue ProcessArbitrary and Capricious
References
0
Case No. ADJ8619322
Regular
Oct 06, 2017

MYRON GARRETT vs. FUTURE GRAPHICS MITSUBISHI; THE TOKIO MARINE AND FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., administered by TOKIO MARINE MANAGEMENT, INC.

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration and Removal filed by applicant Myron Garrett. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration because the underlying WCJ decision was an interlocutory evidentiary ruling, not a final order determining substantive rights or liabilities. Additionally, the petition for removal was denied due to applicant's failure to serve the petition on the defendant. The Board affirmed the WCJ's July 31, 2017 Order Approving Petition to Compel Attendance at PQME Appointment, warning of potential benefit barring for non-compliance.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for Removalfinal ordersubstantive rightliabilitythreshold issueinterlocutoryproceduralevidentiary
References
4
Case No. ADJ1386907 (SRO 0130014) ADJ3877183 (SRO 0140080)
Regular
Aug 07, 2009

Roger Rondeau vs. TRUETIME, INC. and CIGA by BROADSPIRE for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION; TOKIO MARINE AND NICHIDO FIRE INSURANCE

Reconsideration granted to amend award; Tokio Marine liable for CIGA benefits during its coverage period; other issues deferred.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative Trauma InjuryRight Upper ExtremityTokio MarineCIGAReimbursementDate of InjuryCompensable Temporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityAgreed Medical Examiner
References
2
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00302 [135 AD3d 572]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 2016

Domaszowec v. Residential Management Group LLC

Plaintiff Tracy Domaszowec's decedent died from a fall while cleaning a window on the 13th floor of an apartment building. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified a Supreme Court order, granting plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on her Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Residential Management Group LLC and 40 Fifth Avenue Corporation (40 Fifth defendants), the building owner and manager. The court found the decedent was engaged in "commercial window washing," thereby making Labor Law § 240 (1) applicable. The court affirmed the dismissal of Labor Law § 202 against Veronica Bulgari and Stephen Haimo due to lack of exclusive control, and common-law negligence claims against T&L Contracting of N.Y., Inc. and Greenpoint Woodworking Inc. due to the lack of an exception to the contractual obligation rule. Issues of fact precluded summary judgment on negligence claims against Panorama Windows, Ltd., and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was deemed inapplicable to certain defendants.

Window cleaner fatalityScaffold LawSummary judgment appealAppellate Division First DepartmentCommercial vs. routine window washingLabor Law applicabilityContractual tort liabilityRes ipsa loquitur in negligencePunitive damages dismissalExpert witness evidence
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 2,846 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