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

Noell v. City of Carrollton

This dispute involves claims by homeowners in the Air Park Dallas community against a real estate developer, the zoning committee, and the City of Carrollton. The City ordered the airpark's airport closed after annexing a portion of it and passing an ordinance. Homeowners sued the developer and zoning committee for breach of contract, fiduciary duty, and interference with easements, and sued the City challenging the ordinance and closure order. Noell, a homeowner and minority owner of the developer, also challenged the ordinance. The trial court invalidated the closure order and granted relief to homeowners. On appeal, the court affirmed the invalidation of the closure order, reversed the finding that the ordinance was facially valid, and remanded some claims to the trial court. It also modified part of the injunctive relief against the developer and affirmed the judgment in all other respects.

Airpark CommunityEasement RightsMunicipal ZoningNuisance AbatementDue ProcessConstitutional LawContract BreachFiduciary DutyProperty RestrictionsOrdinance Vagueness
References
84
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 11, 2005

Claim of Cook v. Staffing

Claimant sustained back and facial injuries in a 1994 work accident, leading to a 1997 award for facial disfigurement, no lost time, and continued back treatment, then case closure. In 2000, the case reopened to address medical reports and potential benefits, but was subsequently ruled resolved and "not truly closed" by a WCLJ, preventing Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a liability shift to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases. In 2004, claimant sought lost time compensation, and the Workers’ Compensation Board modified the WCLJ's decision, finding the case was indeed closed in 2000, thereby meeting the requirements for § 25-a liability to shift. The Special Fund appealed this determination, arguing the case was not truly closed. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the finding of true closure in 2000 was supported by evidence showing all pending issues had been resolved and no further proceedings were contemplated at that time.

Workers' Compensation Board AppealSpecial Fund LiabilityCase Reopening CriteriaWorkers’ Compensation Law § 25-aPermanent Facial DisfigurementLost Time BenefitsWorkers' Compensation LawAppellate Court AffirmationDate of Case ClosureMedical Treatment Coverage
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Markowitz v. Bloomberg

Petitioners, political representatives of various districts and boroughs in the City of New York, sought to vacate a determination by the New York City Fire Department and other city agencies to close firehouses and dissolve fire companies due to fiscal constraints. They alleged inadequate notice, an arbitrary and capricious decision, and violations of the New York State and City Environmental Quality Review Acts (SEQRA/CEQR). The court found the respondents' decision was not arbitrary or capricious and did not violate environmental laws, categorizing the closures as 'Type II' actions under SEQRA, thus exempt from extensive environmental review. However, the court did identify a failure by respondents to provide proper written notice to specific community entities concerning the closing of Engine Company 261, as mandated by the New York City Charter 487(a). Despite this procedural flaw, the court denied injunctive relief to restore the unit, concluding that the omission was inadvertent and did not prejudice the public's opportunity for protest and debate.

Fiscal CrisisFire DepartmentFirehouse ClosuresPublic SafetyEnvironmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA)New York City CharterNotice RequirementsInjunctive ReliefAdministrative LawJudicial Review
References
12
Case No. ADJ8237611, ADJ8237609
Regular
Jan 10, 2014

CLORIA ZACARIAS vs. TRUE LEAF FARMS, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Gloria Zacarias, seeking workers' compensation. The defendants are True Leaf Farms and its insurer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendants' Petition for Removal. The WCAB found that the petition did not demonstrate irreparable harm as required by WCAB Rule 10843.

Petition for RemovalIrreparable HarmWCAB Rule 10843Administrative Law Judge ReportWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardTrue Leaf FarmsNational Union Fire Insurance CompanyAthens AdministratorsADJ8237611ADJ8237609
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Pietrocola v. Colony Liquor Distributors, Inc.

The case concerns an appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Board regarding the improper closure of a claimant’s case. The Board had ruled that the case was improperly closed because a crucial issue regarding the necessity of surgery remained unresolved. The court affirmed this decision, holding that a closing without resolving a specific issue for which the case was reopened does not constitute a "true closing" under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. Furthermore, because the initial reopening occurred within seven years of the accident, liability for medical bills remained with the employer’s workers’ compensation insurance carrier.

Workers' Compensation LawCase ClosingImproper ClosureLiabilityInsurance CarrierMedical BillsReopening CaseStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewNew York Law
References
2
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00945 [169 AD3d 1141]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 2019

Matter of Guillen v. Tulley Constr.

Claimant Morris Guillen, a construction worker, sought workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained in 2005. The Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) initially established the claim but later found no further causally-related disability after March 2010. Following ongoing disputes regarding treatment requests, the employer and carrier requested transfer of liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a. The WCB ultimately ruled that the case was "truly closed" and transferred liability to the Special Fund, retroactive to October 25, 2011. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, holding that objections to payments for medical care do not prevent a finding of true closure necessary for liability transfer.

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesLiability TransferCase ClosureMedical TreatmentCompensation BenefitsAppellate ReviewTimeliness of AppealPsychiatric DisabilityOrthopedic Disability
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Bates v. Finger Lakes Truck Rental

Claimant, rendered quadriplegic by a 1970 work accident, was classified with a permanent total disability and received weekly compensation and medical benefits. A 2002 settlement agreement, approved by the Workers’ Compensation Board, addressed home healthcare costs and allowed for future adjustments due to significant changes in healthcare requirements. The carrier sought to transfer liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a, arguing the case was closed. The Board denied this, asserting the case was not truly closed due to the permanent total disability and the agreement's provision for future proceedings. The Appellate Division reversed the Board's decision, holding that the need for continued medical care and a contingency for adjusting home healthcare reimbursements do not preclude a "true closure" for § 25-a purposes, and remitted the matter to the Board for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Total DisabilitySpecial Fund for Reopened CasesSettlement AgreementWorkers' Compensation Law § 25-aCase ClosureMedical TreatmentHome HealthcareAppellate ReviewRemittal
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 27, 2013

Claim of Zogaria v. Quebecor World USA Inc.

This case concerns an appeal by the Special Fund for Reopened Cases from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision filed on December 27, 2013. The claimant sustained a left knee injury in 2005, and her workers' compensation claim was established, with benefits paid by January 2007. In 2012, after her physician requested authorization for knee surgery, which the carrier approved, the claimant underwent the procedure. The carrier then sought to transfer liability to the Special Fund under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a, arguing the case met the criteria of more than seven years since injury and three years since the last benefit payment. Although a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially denied the transfer, the Board reversed, finding the case truly closed in February 2012 when surgery was authorized, thus shifting liability to the Special Fund. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concurring that substantial evidence supported the finding of a true closure in February 2012.

Special Fund for Reopened CasesWorkers' Compensation Law § 25-aLiability TransferCase ReopeningTrue ClosureLast Payment of BenefitsSchedule Loss of Use AwardMedical AuthorizationKnee ArthroplastyAppellate Review
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lane v. Tompkins County Sheriff's Department

This case involves an appeal from two decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning a claimant's compensation case. The primary issue is whether the June 9, 1971 closing of the claimant’s case, pending the outcome of a third-party action, constituted a 'true closing' to extend the time for filing a reimbursement claim from the Special Disability Fund under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8). The employer argued that the Board erred in applying a rigid 'true closing' requirement and that the finding of no true closing lacked substantial evidence. The court rejected both arguments, affirming the Board's decisions. It held that the standards for 'true closing' developed under other sections are applicable and that the Board's finding was rational since the closing contemplated further proceedings.

Workers CompensationSpecial Disability FundTrue ClosingThird-Party ActionReimbursement ClaimAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionFactual DeterminationStatutory InterpretationSection 15(8)
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

AEP Texas Central Co. v. Public Utility Commission

This appeal challenges a final order of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) in a true-up proceeding under Chapter 39 of the Utilities Code, concerning stranded costs and other true-up amounts. AEP Texas Central Co. and its affiliate CPL Retail Energy initiated the proceeding, with the State of Texas and various consumer interests intervening. The Supreme Court of Texas reviewed the PUC's decisions on market value, net book value (NBV), and the capacity auction true-up. The Court affirmed the PUC's use of the sale of assets method for nuclear assets and upheld the inclusion of excess mitigation credits and construction work in progress in NBV. Furthermore, the Court confirmed the PUC's authority to adjust NBV for commercially unreasonable conduct, even when market value is determined by asset sale, and found the specific adjustments supported by substantial evidence. However, the Court reversed the lower court's judgment regarding the capacity auction true-up, instructing the PUC to recalculate it based on actual auction prices, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Public Utility CommissionTrue-up ProceedingStranded CostsMarket ValueNet Book ValueCapacity AuctionUtilities CodeTexas LawCommercial ReasonablenessExcess Mitigation Credits
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 288 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