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. ADJ2855195 (MF); ADJ965274
Regular
Jan 23, 2012

MARCELO RUEDA vs. ALL LABOR TIRES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The State Compensation Insurance Fund petitioned for reconsideration of awards made to Marcelo Rueda, arguing that Agreed Medical Examiner (AME) reports by Drs. Hyman and Sanders lacked substantial evidence. Specifically, the Fund disputed impairment ratings for hypertension, upper digestive tract issues, and sleep disorders, as well as the carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis. The judge recommended denying the petition, finding that the AME reports provided reasoned medical opinions supported by the AMA Guides and clinical judgment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further review the complex factual and legal issues involved.

Petition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerAMA GuidesPermanent DisabilityHypertensionUpper Digestive Tract ImpairmentSleep DisorderCarpal Tunnel SyndromeSubstantial EvidenceClinical Judgment
References
2
Case No. ADJ7873101
Regular
Apr 11, 2017

SHERY FRANKLIN vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding that the administrative law judge erred in several permanent disability ratings. Specifically, the WCAB will allow for further proceedings to re-rate permanent disability, incorporating the agreed medical examiner's findings for hypertension and sleep disorder, and rating psyche disability without apportionment. Issues regarding the method of rating cervical spine disability, industrial injury to the upper digestive tract, and entitlement to a Labor Code section 4658(d) increase will also be further developed and decided. The WCAB affirmed the findings on temporary disability and further medical treatment.

WCA BReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorAMEWhole Person ImpairmentWPISleep Disorder
References
11
Case No. 13-ev-3288; 13-cv-4244
Regular Panel Decision

Alzheimer's Disease Resource Center, Inc. v. Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Ass'n

This case involves two related lawsuits stemming from the disaffiliation of the Alzheimer’s Disease Resource Center, Inc. (ADRC) from the Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association (the Association). In case 13-ev-3288, ADRC alleged unfair competition, false advertising, and other claims. The Court denied dismissal for false advertising under the Lanham Act, New York General Business Law § 349, and unjust enrichment, but granted dismissal for trademark infringement, common law unfair competition, UCC violations, conversion, tortious interference, and fraud. In case 13-cv-4244, ADRC alleged breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets related to donor lists. The Court granted the Association's motion to dismiss this complaint in its entirety. Punitive damages were stricken for Lanham Act and unjust enrichment claims.

Unfair CompetitionLanham ActFalse AdvertisingTrademark InfringementNew York General Business Law § 349Unjust EnrichmentMotion to DismissBreach of ContractTrade Secret MisappropriationConversion
References
55
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of John Z.

This case involves an appeal from an order recommitting the respondent to petitioner's custody due to a dangerous mental disorder. The respondent, with a history of multiple killings and a prior finding of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, had his parole revoked after exhibiting aggressive and threatening behavior upon conditional release. The Supreme Court determined he suffered from Antisocial Personality Disorder with narcissistic and paranoid features, which was deemed a dangerous mental disorder justifying civil confinement under CPL 330.20. The appellate court affirmed, rejecting the argument that the diagnosis was legally insufficient and upholding the finding of current dangerousness based on expert testimony, the respondent's history of violence, and his lack of insight into his condition.

dangerous mental disordercivil confinementantisocial personality disordernarcissistic featuresparanoid featuresCPL 330.20recommitmentmental illnessparole revocationexpert testimony
References
10
Case No. ADJ605947 (MON 0274664)
Regular
Feb 02, 2009

LESLIE CELLUCCI vs. FLORENCE MACHINE PRODUCTS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for injuries to the applicant's hands, upper extremities, and neck, resulting in chronic pain syndrome and a sleep disorder. The defendant disputed the extent of permanent disability and the diagnoses of chronic pain syndrome and sleep disorder. The Appeals Board affirmed the finding of industrial injury and the 85% permanent disability rating, including the diagnoses of chronic pain syndrome and sleep disorder. The Board also granted reconsideration to amend the award to include a life pension for the applicant, as required by law for an 85% permanent disability finding.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLeslie CellucciFlorence Machine ProductsState Compensation Insurance FundADJ605947Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityChronic Pain SyndromeSleep Disorder
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sivel v. Readers Digest, Inc.

The case concerns a diversity action where defendants moved for summary judgment regarding plaintiff Sivel's claims of breach of an oral employment contract and misrepresentation against Reader's Digest and its executives. Sivel alleged that he was orally assured permanent employment in the United States and termination only for serious cause, which he argued limited Reader's Digest's right to fire him "at-will." The court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the breach of contract claim, reasoning that Sivel's testimony, if credible, could establish an express agreement overriding the at-will presumption under New York law. However, summary judgment was granted to the defendants on the misrepresentation claims, as the court found these allegations to be inextricably linked to the alleged contract terms and thus enforceable only through a contract action.

Employment ContractAt-Will EmploymentSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractMisrepresentationOral AgreementEmployee HandbookNew York LawFraudulent InducementJob Security
References
13
Case No. ADJ9391561 ADJ8266496
Regular
Apr 12, 2019

HENDRIKUS ANTONIUS BENNINK vs. CITY OF FRESNO

This case involves a police officer claiming industrial injuries to multiple body parts, including orthopedic and digestive systems, in addition to previously resolved cardiovascular and hearing claims. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the trial judge's decision, finding that the applicant did not sustain industrial injuries to his neck, upper extremities, back, legs, or digestive system. This decision was based on substantial evidence from Qualified Medical Examiners (QMEs) who concluded these conditions were degenerative and non-industrial. The WCAB found no error in the QMEs' reasoning or the applicant's failure to prove industrial causation for these specific injuries.

ADJ9391561ADJ8266496Industrial injuryCardiovascular systemHearing lossOrthopedic injuryDigestive systemQMESubstantial evidenceCausation
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 1996

Claim of Palevsky v. New York City Board of Education

In 1986, while working as an education associate in the Bronx, the claimant sustained a fractured nose due to a student altercation and filed a timely workers' compensation claim, receiving benefits. The case remained open for a pending nasal surgery issue. Years later, in 1992, the claimant sought compensation for alleged consequential posttraumatic stress disorder. The self-insured employer, the New York City Board of Education, argued that Workers' Compensation Law § 28, a two-year statute of limitations, barred this new claim. However, both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board affirmed that Section 28 does not apply to consequential injuries. Upon appeal, the Court concurred, holding that a subsequent claim for disability compensation related to injuries in an earlier, timely claim is not barred by the two-year limit for amendment.

Workers' CompensationPosttraumatic Stress DisorderStatute of LimitationsConsequential InjuryWorkers' Compensation Law § 28Time BarBoard DecisionAppealWorkplace InjuryNasal Fracture
References
3
Case No. 10 Civ. 3314; 10 Civ. 5013
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2010

Alzheimer's Foundation of America, Inc. v. Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Ass'n

This consolidated opinion addresses dueling motions to dismiss in two civil actions involving the Alzheimer’s Foundation of Americas, Inc. (the "Foundation") and the Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association (the "Association"). The Foundation initiated a lawsuit alleging misrepresentation, trademark dilution, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, conspiracy, conversion, and UCC violations against the Association and Northern Trust. Conversely, the Association filed its own complaint asserting claims of trademark infringement, libel, injurious falsehood, false designation, dilution, fraud, tortious interference, injury to business reputation, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy against the Foundation and several individuals. The court denied motions to dismiss the Lanham Act, dilution, and unfair competition claims for both parties, but granted motions to dismiss the UCC, conversion, libel, unjust enrichment, and fraud claims, including all claims against Northern Trust. Leave to amend the complaints was granted.

Trademark InfringementUnfair CompetitionLanham ActDilutionUnjust EnrichmentConversionFraudCollateral EstoppelMotion to DismissRule 12(b)(6)
References
59
Case No. ADJ10101304
Regular
Jul 23, 2018

Trace Ellmann vs. Capstone Logistics, Travelers Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed the finding of industrial injury to the applicant's neck, back, shoulders, wrists, hands, and upper extremities based on credible testimony and medical reports. However, the Board reversed the presumption of compensability under Labor Code section 5402(b) because the employer's denial of the claim was timely. The issue of a sleep disorder as a result of the injury was deferred for further determination.

Labor Code section 5402(b)presumption of compensabilityindustrial injuryPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and OrderWCJ Findings and Orderoral notice of injurymandatory settlement conferenceprimary treating physiciansDWC Form 1
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 624 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