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

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. 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
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 22, 2009

Ramirez v. Willow Ridge Country Club, Inc.

This judgment affirms the dismissal of a complaint after a jury trial in New York County. The plaintiff, injured during demolition work at Willow Ridge Country Club, Inc., claimed he fell from a deck with a removed railing, while the foreman stated he fell from ladders while pulling a gutter. The jury found a Labor Law § 240 (1) violation but determined it was not the proximate cause, accepting the foreman's account. The appellate court upheld the verdict, addressing the plaintiff's challenges regarding jury instructions on attorney-client privilege and the preclusion of an unsigned deposition transcript under CPLR 3116. The court found no grounds to overturn the jury's decision or the trial court's rulings.

Demolition accidentJury verdictLabor Law violationProximate causeCPLR 3116Attorney-client privilegeAppellate affirmancePersonal injuryConstruction safetyWitness testimony
References
10
Case No. ADJ4189754 (ANA 0349061)
Regular
Mar 09, 2010

MICHAEL JACOBUS vs. AMERISERVE; CIGA, by its servicing facility, INTERCARE, for RELIANCE INSURANCE, in liquidation

In this case, the defendant sought removal to allow the deposition of a psychiatric AME and to forward applicant's deposition transcript to AMEs, arguing substantial prejudice. The Appeals Board granted removal, allowing the deposition transcript of Dr. Feldman to be offered into evidence. However, the Board deferred the issue of further supplemental reports from the AMEs to the trial judge. The matter was returned to the trial level to be set for trial and for further proceedings.

Removal petitionAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Donald Feldman M.D.Charles Rudner M.D.Deposition transcriptIndustrial injuryTruck driverLoader-unloaderLeft kneePsyche
References
1
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. ADJ9525473
Regular
Sep 11, 2017

MARIA GONZALEZ vs. COTTON GENERATION, INC. doing business as PACIFIC COAST KNITTING, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, PUBLIC SERVICE MUTUAL INSURANCE

Defendant Security National Insurance Company (SNIC) sought removal of this workers' compensation case to the Appeals Board, claiming irreparable harm from an order setting trial without allowing evidence of a key QME deposition transcript. The Appeals Board denied the petition, finding removal to be an extraordinary remedy not warranted here. The QME deposition transcript has since been filed and can be offered at trial, making the prejudice claim moot and reconsideration an adequate remedy. Therefore, the case will proceed to trial as scheduled.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceQualified Medical EvaluatorDeposition TranscriptApportionmentIrreparable HarmAdequate RemedyPre-trial Conference StatementDeclaration of ReadinessCumulative Injury
References
2
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. ADJ11775511
Regular
Sep 25, 2019

FONDA MCGENSY vs. OPERATION SAFEHOUSE, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant's workers' compensation claim for injuries sustained on August 7, 2018. The defendant is seeking reconsideration of the original Findings and Award, arguing the injury is barred by the going and coming rule. The defendant disputes whether the applicant's supervisor ordered her to drive an intern home, which is key to applying the special errand exception. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted reconsideration to obtain a transcript of the trial testimony to fully assess the factual disputes.

Special errand exceptionGoing and coming rulePetition for reconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJTranscriptFactual disputesLegal issuesWCAB Rule 10740Electronic Adjudication Management System
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 03, 1982

Cerrato v. Thurcon Construction Corp.

This case concerns a construction worker (plaintiff) who sustained serious injuries and sued 211 Thompson Corp. (owner) and Thurcon Construction Corp. (general contractor). Defendant 211 Thompson Corp. raised an affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction due to improper service of process. After the Statute of Limitations had expired, plaintiff moved to strike this defense, while 211 cross-moved to dismiss the action as time-barred. Special Term referred the issue of service validity to a referee, but the plaintiff argued for a jury trial on this factual issue. The Appellate Division, Supreme Court, New York County, modified Special Term's order, directing a jury trial on the validity of the service, while otherwise affirming the original determination. The dissenting opinion argued that the right to a jury trial should not be conditioned on the stage of proceedings or the impact of dismissal on the Statute of Limitations, and furthermore, considered the question of authority to accept service as one of law, not fact.

Jury TrialService of ProcessPersonal JurisdictionStatute of LimitationsAffirmative DefenseAppellate ReviewCPLRProcedural LawConstruction AccidentsNew York Courts
References
3
Case No. ADJ3687516
Regular
Jan 26, 2012

RAMONA ANAYA, JUAN JOSE GONZALEZ, JESUS CERVANTES, JULIE ANN CABEZA, WALTER CRABTREE vs. PORT HUENEME UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, J. M. SMUCKERS, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES, AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC., AIG DOMESTIC CLAIMS, INC., GHL ENTERPRISES, CIGA, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., PAULA INSURANCE COMPANY, MARY HEALTH OF THE SICK, REDISED INSURANCE, CRAWFY AND COMPANY, M.R. AUTOMOTIVE, CIGA, Administrative inTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, HIH AMERICA COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Attorney M. Francesca Hannan's request for a waiver of fees or a payment plan for reporter's transcripts. Hannan sought the transcripts to support allegations of bias by a Workers' Compensation Judge and claimed financial hardship and limited time for preparation. The Board found no legal basis for the fee waiver or payment plan under applicable rules and statutes, though it affirmed Hannan's right to obtain the transcripts upon payment.

WCABPetitionReporter's TranscriptFee WaiverPayment PlanGovernment Code 68632Administrative Director Rule 9990Appeals Board Rule 10740AnayaLien Trial
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 5,403 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