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

United States v. Needle Trades Workers' Industrial Union

The indictment charges the defendants, including the Needle Trades Workers’ Industrial Union, with violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act by conspiring to restrain interstate trade in raw skins. The conspiracy involved preventing non-union dressers from processing skins and dealers from shipping to them, employing violent tactics such as threats, assaults, destruction of property, and the use of explosives. The court addressed whether these actions constituted a restraint of interstate commerce, differentiating between local strikes with indirect effects and direct interference with interstate trade. It concluded that the alleged prevention of New York dealers from shipping skins to New Jersey dressers constituted a direct, substantial, and intentional interference with interstate commerce. The court also affirmed that shipping goods for processing across state lines is considered interstate commerce and clarified that the National Industrial Recovery Act did not repeal the Sherman Anti-Trust Act or legalize such a conspiracy. Consequently, the demurrer challenging the sufficiency of the indictment was overruled.

Sherman Anti-Trust ActInterstate CommerceLabor UnionConspiracyDemurrerIndictmentTrade RestraintViolenceSecondary BoycottLabor Disputes
References
9
Case No. ADJ10544189
Regular
Nov 09, 2018

MARTIN GARCIA vs. HARVEST CHURCH, GUIDEONE MUTUAL

This case involves an applicant seeking an increased permanent impairment rating for a psychiatric injury stemming from a physical injury to his left foot. The applicant's injury occurred when a gate fell on his foot, and he claims this constitutes a "violent act" under Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(2)(A), which allows for exceptions to a general rule against increased impairment ratings for psychiatric issues arising from physical injuries. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the gate falling was an accidental injury, not a violent act, based on definitions involving strong physical force or extreme threats. The Board found the applicant's experience lacked the intensity seen in prior cases of violent acts, such as being struck by a car or being crushed in a vehicle.

AOE/COEViolent ActLabor Code Section 4660.1Psychiatric InjuryPermanent Impairment RatingPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Industrial InjuryPreponderance of the Evidence
References
6
Case No. ADJ9474687
Regular
Jun 14, 2019

GUSTAVO NIEVES UGALDE vs. ROCKWELL DRYWALL, INC., STARR INDEMNITY, adjusted by YORK RISK MANAGEMENT GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the prior award and remanded the case for further proceedings, finding the applicant's psychiatric injury was a consequence of his physical injury, not directly from a violent act. The Board determined the applicant's fall from stilts, while accepted as industrial, did not meet the legal definition of a "violent act" required for an increased psychiatric impairment rating under Labor Code § 4660.1(c)(2)(A). Therefore, the case must be returned to allow the WCJ to first determine if the injury qualifies as "catastrophic" under § 4660.1(c)(2)(B) for potential increased psychiatric rating. The WCAB acknowledged the applicant's credible testimony regarding the use of stilts and the psychiatric QME's opinion on causation but found the issue of a "violent act" was not sufficiently established.

AOE/COEViolent ActCompensable ConsequencePsychiatric InjuryPermanent DisabilityReconsiderationFindings and AwardMedical EvaluatorVocational ExpertLabor Code Section 4660.1
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

R.M. Perlman Inc. v. New York Coat, Suit, Dresses, Rainwear & Allied Workers' Union Local 89-22-1

This case involves R.M. Perlman, d/b/a Rebecca Moses Collection (RMC), a garment industry employer, suing two labor unions, Local 89-22-1 and the International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union. The suit stemmed from picketing aimed at compelling RMC to enter into a Hazantown Agreement, which RMC alleged involved violence and caused substantial losses. The amended complaint included federal claims under the National Labor Relations Act and state law claims such as prima facie tort, intentional interference with contractual relations, and defamation. The defendants moved to dismiss the state law claims, arguing federal preemption and RMC's failure to meet New York's specific pleading requirements for actions against unincorporated associations. The court found the state law claims were not preempted due to allegations of violent picketing, aligning with exceptions to federal preemption. However, the court ultimately granted the dismissal of the state law claims (counts two through seven) because RMC failed to allege that every single union member authorized or ratified the violent acts, as required by the New York Court of Appeals decision in Martin v. Curran. Additionally, the individual defendants Byer and Mazur were dismissed because the remaining federal claim under the Labor-Management Relations Act does not allow for individual liability. A motion to dismiss Rebecca Moses as a plaintiff was denied, pending further evidence on her standing. Plaintiffs were granted thirty days to replead the dismissed state law claims.

Labor LawFederal PreemptionState Law ClaimsUnincorporated AssociationsUnion LiabilityViolent PicketingHazantown AgreementMotion to DismissNational Labor Relations ActLabor Management Relations Act
References
31
Case No. ADJ9254144
Regular
May 03, 2019

SYLVIA DURAN vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION, NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to correct clerical errors in the initial Findings of Fact and Award. The Board amended the award to accurately reflect the applicant's stipulated average weekly earnings and temporary total disability indemnity rate. Additionally, a statutory citation regarding violent acts was corrected. The Board otherwise affirmed the original award, which found industrial injury to multiple body parts and awarded 42% permanent disability, but did not classify the injury as a result of a violent act.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeAOE/COETemporary Total DisabilityPermanent Disability IndemnityViolent ActLabor Code 3208.3Labor Code 4660.1(c)(2)(A)
References
0
Case No. ADJ10393124
Regular
Oct 02, 2019

MINDY SPITZ vs. REALOGY HOLDINGS CORPORATION, AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA

The applicant, Mindy Spitz, sought workers' compensation for a psychiatric injury, claiming it resulted from a violent act at work. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the prior decision that she did not prove her psychiatric condition was predominantly caused by employment events. The WCAB found that the incidents described by the applicant did not constitute a "violent act" as legally defined, thus requiring the predominant cause standard for compensation. Consequently, the WCAB concluded that the applicant's claim failed under the applicable legal standard and the evidence presented.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and OrderAdministrative Law JudgeQualified Medical EvaluatorPredominant CauseSubstantial CauseViolent ActPsychiatric InjuryAOE/COE
References
10
Case No. ADJ8653693, ADJ9198791, ADJ9556591
Regular
Mar 12, 2019

KIMBERLY ALLEN vs. ANTELOPE VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case concerns three workers' compensation claims for injuries sustained by the applicant, Kimberly Allen, as a receptionist. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review findings that psychiatric impairment ratings were applicable due to alleged violent acts. The Board amended the findings to exclude psychiatric impairment from the permanent disability awards, determining the applicant's injuries did not result from a "violent act" under the relevant Labor Code section. Consequently, the permanent disability ratings and attorney's fees for all three claims were revised downwards.

AOE/COEPsychiatric InjuryPermanent DisabilityReconsiderationViolent ActLabor Code Section 4660.1Compensable ConsequenceAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Cumulative TraumaSpecific Injury
References
15
Case No. ADJ8815528
Regular
Aug 22, 2016

RICARDO SALINAS vs. SOUTHEAST PERSONNEL LEASING, INC.; STATE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision finding his psychiatric injury, stemming from a fall, was not compensable at an increased impairment rating. The applicant argued the injury was a "violent act" or "catastrophic" under Labor Code § 4660.1, thereby exempting it from limitations on psychiatric impairment increases. The Workers' Compensation Judge recommended denying reconsideration, finding the applicant's fall lacked the element of a violent act and that the resulting orthopedic injury and restrictions did not qualify as catastrophic. The judge concluded that the mere fact of hospitalization did not elevate the injury to catastrophic status.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boardpsychiatric injuryLabor Code § 3208.3Labor Code § 4660.1catastrophic injuryviolent actpredominant causesix months employmentorthopedic injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ9034489
Regular
May 17, 2016

DEBORAH LARSEN vs. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES

This case involves an applicant who sustained accepted physical injuries and a psychological injury after being struck by a car while working as a security guard. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant's psychiatric disability resulted from a "violent act." The Board clarified that "violent act" under Labor Code section 3208.3 is not limited to criminal conduct but includes events involving strong physical force. Therefore, the applicant's psychological injury, stemming from being hit by a vehicle, qualifies for increased permanent disability benefits.

AOE/COEpsychiatric disabilityviolent actLabor Code section 4660.1(c)permanent disabilityapportionmentPetition for ReconsiderationWCJSedgwick CMSSecuritas Security Services
References
0
Case No. ADJ9625221
Regular
Nov 02, 2019

MATEO LOPEZ vs. SOUTH STATE TOWING, THE HARTFORD, administered by MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a prior award finding applicant sustained injury AOE/COE, including a psychiatric component, due to a "violent act." The Board determined the applicant's fall from a truck, while assisting a tow, did not meet the legal definition of a "violent act." Due to newly issued precedent regarding the "catastrophic injury" exception under Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(2)(B), the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to assess this alternative basis for an increased psychiatric impairment rating. The WCAB also noted a need to clarify whether the psychiatric injury was a direct result of employment events or a consequence of the physical injury.

AOE/COEViolent ActLabor Code Section 4660.1(c)(2)(A)Psychiatric InjuryPermanent DisabilityAggravationAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Depressive DisorderWhole Person Impairment
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 3,578 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