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. ADJ8603938
Regular
Sep 18, 2015

MACARIO IGLESIAS vs. ABE EL PRODUCE, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's exclusion of their exhibits. The exhibits were deemed untimely filed as they were received by the Board less than 20 days before trial, contrary to a pre-trial order. The Board confirmed that the relevant Appeals Board rule regarding filing dates had not been repealed and that the lien claimant failed to meet their burden of proof. A dissenting opinion argued the pre-trial order was potentially ambiguous and that the exhibits should have been admitted given timely service and no prejudice to the defendant.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals Judge (WCJ)ExhibitsTimely filedRepealed ruleRule 10392Pre-trial conference
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fedrau v. Porcelain Insulator Corp.

The trial court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's negligence complaint, as there were issues of fact that should have been decided by a jury. Consequently, the judgment was reversed on the law and facts, and a new trial was granted. A dissenting opinion argued that no cause of action was established, asserting a lack of proof that the plant owner breached any duty owed to the plaintiff. The dissent further contended that the plaintiff, a skilled worker, exhibited contributory negligence by disregarding warnings about the roof's instability.

NegligenceContributory NegligenceForeseeabilityTrial Court ErrorJury QuestionsNew TrialAppellate ReviewPremises LiabilityWorker SafetyDuty to Warn
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rowe v. Board of Education

Plaintiff sued Chatham Central School District Middle School for negligence after sustaining injuries from a fall in the school cafeteria, allegedly due to accumulated mud, water, and a lack of rain mats. The defendant School District subsequently impleaded the Chatham Central Teachers’ Association, claiming the Association was in control of the cafeteria and responsible for the plaintiff's injuries. Following a trial, the jury rendered a verdict of no cause for action in favor of both the School District and the Association. However, Special Term set aside this verdict and granted a new trial, based on evidence suggesting an accumulation of mud and water and the defendant's failure to provide janitorial services. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed Special Term's order, reinstating the original jury verdict, concluding that the jury's finding was not against the weight of the evidence given the conflicting testimony presented at trial.

NegligencePremises LiabilitySlip and FallJury VerdictWeight of EvidenceAppellate ReviewNew Trial Order ReversedSchool CafeteriaChatham Central School DistrictColumbia County
References
3
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05688
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2025

Matter of Sahara Constr. Corp. v. New York City Off. of Admin. Trials & Hearings

Sahara Construction Corp. challenged a determination by the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH) that upheld civil penalties and a restitution order for violations related to a home improvement project. The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed the CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court confirmed OATH's determination, finding that the imposed civil penalties of $5,000 and restitution of $230,266.63 were not disproportionate and fell within statutory guidelines. The Court also affirmed the denial of the petitioner's motions to dismiss and compel discovery, concluding they were not arbitrary and capricious. Consequently, the petition was denied, and the proceeding dismissed on the merits.

Home Improvement ContractorsCivil PenaltiesRestitution AwardAdministrative Code ViolationsCPLR Article 78Judicial ReviewAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionSense of FairnessAdministrative Summons
References
7
Case No. ADJ7522823
Regular
Nov 21, 2016

JEFFREY GOTTLIEB vs. KITCHEN FOR EXPLORING FOODS, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and admitted lien claimant's Exhibits 15 and 16, overturning their exclusion by the trial judge. The Board found the exhibits were listed with sufficient specificity to avoid substantial prejudice to the defendant. Consequently, the case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, deferring the final determination of the liens for Southern California Mental Health and Hepps Prescription Pharmacy. This decision aims to achieve substantial justice and prioritize a hearing on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrdersPre-Trial Conference StatementLien ClaimantPrimary Treating PhysicianCompromise and ReleasePanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial JusticeAdmitted Exhibits
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jo v. JPMC Specialty Mortg., LLC

Mee Jin-Jo (now deceased and represented by her daughter Billian Jo) filed a pro se lawsuit against JPMC Specialty Mortgage, LLC, alleging improper retention of property after her eviction. Following a jury verdict of "no cause of action," Plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial under Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court addressed Plaintiff's grievances concerning evidentiary rulings, consistency between in limine rulings and trial decisions, the presence of a corporate representative, proper service of discovery documents, opportunity to review deposition transcripts, judicial conduct, and the admissibility of new evidence and lay opinion testimony. The Court denied the motion, concluding that Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that a new trial was warranted.

Motion for New TrialRule 59 FRCPEvidentiary RulingsJury VerdictHarmless ErrorCorporate RepresentativeDeposition TranscriptLay Opinion TestimonyFederal Rules of EvidenceJudicial Discretion
References
50
Case No. ADJ394613 (VNO 0530712) ADJ2266356 (VNO 0530710)
Regular
Apr 01, 2016

MARIA ESTRELLA vs. NATIONAL EXPRESS CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal to a lien claimant after a judge excluded four exhibits. The WCAB found that two of the excluded exhibits, representing certifications and financial interest notifications, were sufficiently listed on the Pre-Trial Conference Statement. Therefore, the WCAB admitted these two exhibits into evidence, amending the judge's prior order. The remainder of the judge's order, excluding the other two exhibits, was affirmed.

Petition for RemovalLien ClaimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJExhibitsPrejudiceIrreparable HarmPre-Trial Conference StatementServiceNotification of Certification
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Feng Ling Liu

The case concerns a motion for a new trial filed by Rui Yang and her co-defendants, Feng Ling Liu and Vanessa Bandrich, who were convicted of conspiracy to commit immigration fraud. The defendants argued for a new trial under Fed.R.Crim.P. 33, alleging juror misconduct by Juror 2, who purportedly lied about social media activity and exhibited bias during the trial. The Court found that Juror 2's tweets, while discussing her experience, did not delve into the substance of the case and showed no dishonesty or bias, nor did they cause prejudice to the defendants. Concluding that no manifest injustice occurred, the District Court denied the defendants' motion for a new trial.

Juror misconductSocial mediaNew trial motionFed.R.Crim.P. 33Immigration fraudConspiracyJuror biasSixth AmendmentImpartial juryVoir dire
References
29
Case No. ADJ7618189
Regular
Nov 26, 2012

RUBEN OROZCO vs. EXACT STAFF, INC.; TOWER/NSM INSUREX, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP

This case involves lien claimants Anderson Chiropractic and Santana Lopez seeking reconsideration of an order disallowing their liens. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because a crucial exhibit, Exhibit 6, was incomplete in the record. Lien claimants are ordered to file a complete copy of Exhibit 6 within 10 days to allow the Board to properly review the case. This action is necessary for the Board to study the facts and applicable law concerning the disallowed liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien claimantsFindings and OrdersDisallowed liensExhibit 6Administrative law judgeWCJSupplemental pleadingSan Francisco
References
0
Case No. ADJ8075448
Regular
Oct 10, 2017

ALEX ROBLES vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a trial judge's award in favor of applicant Alex Robles against Southern California Gas Company (SCGC). SCGC sought reconsideration, asserting that crucial testimony was omitted from the trial record. The WCAB ordered transcription of all trial testimony to ensure a full and fair adjudication of SCGC's petition. This action was necessary to allow the Board further study of the factual and legal issues involved.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAOE/COEGoing and Coming RuleMinutes of HearingSummary of EvidenceTrial TestimonyWCAB Rule 10740Transcript TranscriptionElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 5,533 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