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. ADJ18298511, ADJ16041068, ADJ16041077
Regular
Apr 29, 2025

ERNEST WINSLOW vs. CITY OF ALAMEDA, PSI, administered by LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS

Ernest Winslow, an employee of the City of Alameda, sustained injuries on September 1, 2023, while pursuing and attempting to block a stolen city truck. The City of Alameda denied his workers' compensation claim, arguing his actions were an unauthorized departure from employment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that Winslow's injury arose out of and in the course of his employment. The WCAB concluded that Winslow's actions, while potentially reckless, were an unauthorized manner of performing his duties to protect employer property, not an abandonment of his employment.

AOE/COECourse of EmploymentUnauthorized DepartureValenzuela v. WCABWestbrooks v. WCABWilliams v. WCABLabor Code Section 5909Petition for ReconsiderationReport and RecommendationElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Yi Ching Liu

The case concerns defendant Yi Ching Liu, who was charged with using unauthorized credit card convenience checks and pled guilty. Liu sought a downward departure from sentencing guidelines, claiming diminished capacity due to pathological gambling addiction. Expert testimony from psychotherapist Stephen Block, supported by DSM IV criteria, confirmed Liu's severe addiction and a direct link to his criminal acts. The court, presided over by Senior District Judge Weinstein, granted a four-point downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.13, resulting in a 24-month incarceration sentence. The decision emphasizes that pathological gambling can constitute significantly reduced mental capacity for sentencing purposes, citing precedent and the evolving understanding of this disorder.

Diminished CapacityPathological GamblingSentencing GuidelinesDownward DepartureImpulse Control DisorderFraudCredit Card FraudCriminal SentencingDSM IVFederal Court
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2001

United States v. Kloda

Defendants Samuel Kloda and Frieda Kloda pleaded guilty to federal tax evasion and conspiracy, admitting to falsifying nearly $900,000 in invoices to evade over $388,000 in federal, state, and local taxes. Although the Sentencing Guidelines indicated a 15-21 month imprisonment range, District Judge Hellerstein granted significant downward departures. Frieda Kloda, a single mother, was sentenced to six months imprisonment, with her custody deferred. Samuel Kloda received twelve months and one day due to his health, his wife's illness, and his critical role in their printing business, with his custody also deferred. Both defendants were ordered to pay full restitution to the taxing authorities and serve two years of supervised release.

Tax EvasionConspiracySentencing GuidelinesDownward DepartureFamily ResponsibilitiesMedical ConditionBusiness PreservationRestitutionSupervised ReleaseCriminal Punishment
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 12, 2011

In re Claim of Williams

Claimant, a maintenance worker, was disqualified from unemployment insurance benefits after voluntarily leaving his employment early during a snowstorm without authorization. Despite being warned by his supervisor that leaving would constitute job abandonment, he departed and was subsequently terminated. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denied his benefits application, finding he lacked good cause for leaving. On appeal, the decision was affirmed, with the court noting that unauthorized early departure in disregard of a supervisor's directive can be construed as job abandonment. The conflicting testimony presented a credibility issue, which the Board was entitled to resolve.

Unemployment BenefitsVoluntary DepartureGood CauseJob AbandonmentSupervisory DirectiveCredibility IssueAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceSnowstormTermination
References
4
Case No. ADJ7062572
Regular
Apr 28, 2011

ANA LILIA RODRIGUEZ vs. COUNTRY VILLA HEALTH SERVICES, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. administered by TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an award of temporary disability indemnity to an applicant who received treatment outside a valid Medical Provider Network (MPN). The Board overturned the original award, ruling that reports from physicians outside the MPN are inadmissible under current case law, *Valdez v. Warehouse Demo Services*. Consequently, the applicant is not entitled to temporary disability indemnity, reimbursement to the EDD, or attorney's fees based on those inadmissible reports. However, the applicant's unauthorized departure from the MPN was not deemed an unreasonable refusal of medical treatment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMedical Provider Network (MPN)Labor Code Section 4616.6Unauthorized Medical TreatmentAdmissibility of Medical ReportsTemporary Disability IndemnityEmployment Development Department (EDD)Attorney's FeesUnreasonable Refusal of Medical TreatmentLabor Code Section 4056
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Group For The South Fork, Inc. v. Wines

This case involves a CPLR article 78 proceeding initiated by a petitioner against the Planning Board of the Town of Southampton. The petitioner challenged the Board's preliminary approval of a subdivision application, arguing an inadequate environmental review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The Supreme Court annulled the Planning Board's determination and directed the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed, with the court finding that the petitioner's claims were not time-barred and that the Planning Board's issuance of a 'conditioned negative declaration' was an unauthorized departure from SEQRA, lacking a 'hard look' and 'reasoned elaboration' for its environmental impact determination.

CPLR Article 78Environmental ReviewSEQRAPlanning BoardSubdivision ApplicationDraft Environmental Impact StatementConditioned Negative DeclarationStatute of LimitationsAppellate ReviewLiteral Compliance
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 05, 1998

In re the Claim of Diallo

Claimant, a hotel desk clerk, was discharged for repeatedly leaving work early without securing proper coverage and for falsifying his time sheet. He had prior permission to leave early only if a co-worker covered his shift, a condition he failed to consistently meet. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that his termination was due to misconduct, thereby disqualifying him from unemployment insurance benefits. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence that unauthorized departures and falsified time sheets constitute disqualifying misconduct, especially after warnings. The court also upheld the Board's authority to resolve credibility disputes, despite the claimant's differing account of events.

MisconductUnemployment Insurance BenefitsEmployment TerminationFalsifying Time SheetUnauthorized AbsenceAppeal Board DecisionCredibility IssuesJudicial ReviewHotel Desk Clerk
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 28, 1980

In re the Rehabilitation of Empire Mutual Insurance

The claimant, Armando Barone, sustained injuries at Elan’s Service Station when struck by a vehicle. His claim for first-party no-fault benefits from Empire Mutual Insurance Co., the vehicle's insurer, was denied by a referee and affirmed by Special Term. This dissenting opinion argues for reversing Special Term's order, contending that the injuries arose from the "use or operation" of a motor vehicle under Insurance Law § 672 (subd 1, par [a]). The dissent asserts that the Superintendent of Insurance’s regulation, interpreted to exclude such claims, is an unauthorized and invalid departure from statutory intent. It also addresses the claimant's $150,000 settlement with Elan’s Service Station, finding it does not bar his no-fault claim due to court approval and the settlement exceeding $50,000, but mandates a hearing to determine any potential setoff for Empire.

No-fault benefitsAutomobile insuranceUse or operationService station injuryRegulatory interpretationInsurance LawVehicle and Traffic LawDissenting opinionSettlementLien rights
References
6
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 04674 [219 AD3d 1438]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 20, 2023

People v. Jony

This case is an appeal from an order designating the defendant, Hassan M. Jony, as a level two sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA). The Supreme Court, Queens County, assessed 85 points, including 20 points under risk factor 7 for establishing a relationship with the victim for the primary purpose of victimization, and denied a downward departure. Jony challenged both the risk factor 7 assessment and the denial of a downward departure. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the order, finding clear and convincing evidence that Jony groomed the 13 to 14-year-old complainant through sexually explicit communications after meeting her through her uncle. The court concluded that the facts distinguished the case from People v Cook and upheld the denial of downward departure due to the significant age disparity.

Sex Offender Registration ActSORARisk Factor 7GroomingDownward DepartureAppellate DivisionChild Sexual AbuseRelationship with VictimClear and Convincing EvidencePresumptive Risk Level
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

American Federation of Television & Radio Artists v. Benton & Bowles, Inc.

The plaintiff, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, AFL-CIO (AFTRA), initiated this action to vacate and modify a portion of an arbitration award against Benton & Bowles, Inc. (B&B). The dispute centered on performer compensation for rebroadcasts of the 'Texas' soap opera on a hybrid free TV/basic cable system, a scenario not explicitly covered by their collective bargaining agreement (TV Code), and B&B's unauthorized editing of the program. The arbitration panel found B&B violated the TV Code by editing without AFTRA's consent and fashioned a compensation remedy. The District Court affirmed the arbitrators' compensation award, finding it a plausible solution to an unforeseen contractual gap. However, the court vacated the part of the award that implicitly permitted continued unauthorized editing, ruling that this exceeded the arbitrators' contractual authority, and remanded the case for modification to enjoin B&B from further unauthorized editing.

Labor disputeArbitration awardCollective bargaining agreementTV CodeRebroadcast feesEditing rightsArbitrator authorityJudicial reviewContract interpretationSummary judgment
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 279 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