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
Aug 19, 2010

In re Allen Children

The Department of Social Services (DSS) moved to reopen a trial to admit a certificate of conviction from Town of Sandy Creek Justice Court against the respondent father, Mr. Allen, for endangering the welfare of a child. The original neglect petition against Mr. Allen had been dismissed. The court considered factors for reopening a trial, including the sufficiency of the offer of proof, potential prejudice, and whether the evidence would add to the record. The court denied the motion, finding that while the conduct in both proceedings was similar and Mr. Allen had a full and fair opportunity to litigate in the criminal action, the conviction for endangering the welfare of a child did not, by itself, prove actual or imminent physical, emotional, or mental impairment to the child, which is a required element for a finding of neglect under Family Court Act § 1012(f)(i)(B). Therefore, the certificate of conviction lacked collateral estoppel effect and would not provide new evidence or add anything to the record.

Reopening TrialCollateral EstoppelNeglect PetitionChild EndangermentCertificate of ConvictionSufficiency of EvidenceFamily Court JurisdictionParental Minimum Degree of CarePrejudiceOffer of Proof
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 12, 1998

Quispe v. Lemle & Wolff, Inc.

The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed a lower court's denial of the defendants' motion for a new trial on liability. The central issue on appeal was the trial court's refusal to admit a hospital triage report into evidence. The report contained conflicting accounts of how the plaintiff sustained injuries, specifically whether she fell from a fire escape or jumped from a window to escape a fire, both from a height of eight feet. The court found the report inadmissible under both the business entry exception to the hearsay rule and as an admission against interest. This was due to the defendants' failure to prove that the plaintiff was the direct source of the recorded information, as the plaintiff spoke only Spanish and the nurse relied on unidentified EMS workers and a hospital translator. Furthermore, the court noted that the cause of the injury was not pertinent to the plaintiff's diagnosis or treatment, which further precluded its admission under the business records exception. The defendants' argument that the translator acted as the plaintiff's agent was also rejected as lacking factual support.

Hearsay RuleBusiness Entry ExceptionAdmission Against InterestHospital Triage ReportMedical Records AdmissibilityTranslation AccuracyInterpreter CompetencyCause of InjuryNew Trial MotionAppellate Review
References
3
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. Motion sequence Nos. 002 and 005
Regular Panel Decision

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Escape Media Group, Inc.

UMG Recordings, Inc. sued Escape Media Group, Inc. for common-law copyright infringement and unfair competition. Escape asserted DMCA safe harbor and CDA preemption defenses, along with Donnelly Act and tortious interference counterclaims. The court denied UMG's motion to dismiss the DMCA safe harbor defense, ruling it applies to pre-1972 recordings. However, the court granted UMG's motion to dismiss the CDA preemption defense, clarifying that the CDA's intellectual property exemption covers both federal and state laws. Additionally, Escape's Donnelly Act counterclaim was dismissed, but UMG's motions to dismiss the tortious interference counterclaims were denied, rejecting defenses like the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and economic interest.

Copyright InfringementDMCA Safe HarborPre-1972 RecordingsUnfair CompetitionCommunications Decency ActTortious InterferenceDonnelly ActNew York Common LawInternet Service ProvidersAntitrust
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Burton

Ottaway Newspapers, Inc., publisher of the Times Herald Record, sought access to court files in a brutal murder and rape case involving an unnamed defendant. Access was initially denied by the County Court of Sullivan County, citing Civil Rights Law § 50-b and concerns about prejudicing the defendant's right to a fair trial. The Record appealed, arguing that § 50-b should not apply due to the victim's death and prior disclosure of identity, and that fair trial concerns were not adequately demonstrated. The appellate court reversed the County Court's order, finding that Civil Rights Law § 50-b does not extend to deceased victims whose identity has been disclosed. The court also determined that the justifications for sealing the records based on fair trial prejudice were insufficient under both First Amendment and common-law access standards, granting the Record's application for access to the documents in redacted form.

Public Access to RecordsFirst Amendment RightsFair Trial RightsSealing Court RecordsCivil Rights Law § 50-bFreedom of the PressPrejudicial PublicityCommon-Law Right of AccessRape Victim PrivacyAppellate Review
References
15
Case No. ADJ2189039 (LAO 0881468) ADJ890803 (LAO 0881469) ADJ2121987 (LAO 0883852)
Regular
Feb 02, 2009

ELIAS MARTINEZ vs. STANDARD PARKING, ESIS/ACE USA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's November 17, 2008 orders. The WCJ had improperly denied applicant's petition for costs and attorney fees and removed the matter from calendar without a trial or adequate record. The Board found the record insufficient to determine timeliness of the petition or the merits of the disputes. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision after a proper trial record is established.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationRemovalWCJOff CalendarCostsAttorneys' FeesTrial RecordStipulated AwardTemporary Disability Indemnity
References
0
Case No. ADJ7719607
Regular
Jul 27, 2012

STEVE WEDDLE vs. CITY OF PASADENA

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the judge's order to take the case off calendar. The applicant's attorney declared readiness for trial and completed discovery, then unsuccessfully sought to continue the trial to develop the record. The Board found the judge abused discretion by ordering further discovery without trial or evidence submission. The case is returned for trial, with the judge retaining discretion to order record development post-trial if necessary.

Petition for RemovalOff Calendar OrderMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedDiscovery ClosureMedical Record DevelopmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorMcDuffie v. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit AuthorityWCJ DiscretionTrial Readiness
References
1
Case No. ADJ2036926 (FRE 0233858) ADJ1097945 (FRE 0233859)
Regular
Sep 16, 2010

LINDLA PINI vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO, YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, rescinding the judge's order to take the cases off calendar. The judge had determined further medical evidence was needed before trial, but the Board found this premature, as no evidence had yet been admitted. The Board stated that the necessity of augmenting the medical record can only be established after trial or submission for decision, not beforehand. The cases were returned to the trial level to be set for trial, with the judge retaining the power to supplement the record if necessary post-trial.

removalrescinded orderoff calendarmedical record developmentAlmaraz/Guzmansubstantial medical evidencesupplemental reportAME depotrial exhibitsmandatory settlement conference
References
1
Case No. ADJ1393892
Regular
Aug 16, 2011

JOSE NAVARRO vs. LOCKHEED

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration regarding an alleged March 12, 1990 injury, upholding the WCJ's finding that no industrial injury occurred. The Board granted removal on its own motion to address potential sanctions against applicant's counsel for citing medical records not present in the official record, which is a violation of WCAB rules and attorney ethics. The Board issued a Notice of Intention to impose $1,000 in sanctions jointly against the attorney and his firm, and awarded attorney's fees to the defendant. Other outstanding issues in the consolidated cases are returned to the trial level for further proceedings by the WCJ.

Petition for ReconsiderationQualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidenceCredibility DeterminationMisleading PetitionSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813WCAB RulesAttorney's DutyEvidence Outside Record
References
4
Case No. 24-110050
Regular Panel Decision
May 29, 2025

People v. S.

The defendant, S., faced charges of forcible touching and endangering the welfare of a child. The defense's motion to dismiss the case was rooted in claims of Speedy Trial violations, constitutional concerns regarding access to confidential psychiatric records, and arguments in the interest of justice. Specifically, the defense challenged the People's Certificate of Compliance, alleging non-disclosure of the complainant's psychiatric records from RCPC and other police/CPS records. The Justice Court denied the defendant's motion in its entirety, ruling that the complainant's psychiatric and CPS records are not discoverable under CPL Art. 245 in this non-court-of-record venue, and upholding the validity of the People's speedy trial declaration. The court further declined to dismiss the case on constitutional grounds or in the interest of justice.

Criminal ProcedureMental Hygiene LawJudiciary LawSpeedy TrialDiscovery ObligationsConfidentialityPsychiatric RecordsCourts of RecordJustice CourtSubpoena Duces Tecum
References
87
Showing 1-10 of 8,193 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