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. ADJ9900384 ADJ10047409
Regular
Apr 07, 2016

SARA LOPEZ vs. AIRPORT CENTURY INN, PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of an approved Compromise and Release (OACR) in a workers' compensation claim. The defendant sought to vacate the OACR due to a claimed mutual mistake regarding the applicant's Social Security benefits. Notably, the applicant also requested the OACR be vacated for the same reason. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding its discretion broader than that of the WCJ when reviewing an OACR via a petition for reconsideration. The Board vacated the OACR, allowing the parties to resolve the issue of Medicare Set Aside and resubmit their settlement.

Petition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseMutual Mistake of FactVacated OrderGood CauseAppeals Board DiscretionLabor Code SectionsMedicare Set AsideHousekeeper
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 09, 2009

Prand Corp. v. Town Board of Town of East Hampton

This case involves a hybrid proceeding initiated by petitioners/plaintiffs to challenge a determination by the Town Board of the Town of East Hampton. The petitioners sought to annul Local Law No. 25 (2007), which amended the Open Space Preservation Law, and to declare Local Law No. 16 (2005) and Local Law No. 25 (2007) null and void. The Town Board, acting as the lead agency, had issued a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) for Local Law No. 25, obviating the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Supreme Court annulled Local Law No. 25 as it applied to the petitioners' property, finding it was enacted in violation of SEQRA, and remitted the matter for full SEQRA review. The appellate court affirmed this judgment, concluding that the Town Board failed to take the requisite "hard look" at potential environmental impacts such as soil erosion, vegetation removal, and conflicts with the community's comprehensive plan, thus improperly issuing the negative declaration.

SEQRAEnvironmental LawZoning LawLand UseLocal Law No. 25 (2007)Local Law No. 16 (2005)Comprehensive PlanNegative DeclarationEnvironmental Impact StatementTown Board
References
16
Case No. ADJ9474597
Regular
Jun 17, 2018

SERGIO TERRAZAS vs. SEAL SCIENCE, INC., THE HARTFORD, ADMINISTERED BY ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted The Hartford's Petition for Reconsideration concerning an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR). Hartford argued the original OACR incorrectly failed to deduct \$4,140.00 in permanent disability advances from the \$20,000 settlement. The WCAB rescinded the OACR, returning the matter to the trial level to determine if the Compromise and Release should be amended to reflect the advances. The WCJ will then decide whether to reinstate the original OACR or approve an amended one after further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseSet Aside OrderCompromise and ReleasePermanent Disability AdvancesOffsetRescindAlterAmendContinuing Jurisdiction
References
1
Case No. ADJ6627328
Regular
Aug 16, 2010

MANUEL ALEMAN vs. TOWER CLEANING SYSTEMS, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise & Release (OACR) due to potential procedural issues regarding the timeliness of the applicant's petition and the adequacy of the underlying settlement. The Board found the petition timely filed as service of the OACR was not properly documented. Furthermore, there were significant deficiencies in the medical evidence available to assess the OACR's adequacy, particularly concerning the applicant's claimed injuries to the psyche, neck, back, and neurological system. Consequently, the OACR was rescinded, and the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Order Approving Compromise & ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationWCABWCJDismissal of AttorneyTimelinessService of ProcessAdequacy of Compromise & ReleaseMedical ReportsEAMS
References
10
Case No. ADJ20307046
Regular
Apr 01, 2025

FRANK UWAKWE vs. AMAZON COM INC; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CORPORATION

Applicant Frank Uwakwe sought reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR), arguing he did not understand the settlement terms and that the OACR failed to consider all claimed injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) received a Report and Recommendation from the WCJ suggesting the Petition be treated as one to set aside the OACR and returned to the trial level. Citing its continuing jurisdiction and contract principles, the WCAB dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as premature. The matter is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the petition as one to set aside the OACR, conduct further proceedings, and potentially order medical-legal reporting.

Petition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseSet Aside OACRMeeting of the MindsMutual ConsentContract PrinciplesGood CauseDue ProcessFair Hearing
References
20
Case No. ADJ4120960
Regular
May 06, 2011

JESSICA HAWIT vs. NATIONS CAPITAL GROUP, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) that included a phrase about the applicant being held harmless, which was not in the original settlement agreement. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service of the OACR. While affirming the settlement amount, the Board amended the OACR to strike the "applicant is to be held harmless" language, as the WCJ could not unilaterally rewrite the parties' agreed-upon terms.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationWCJDefective ServiceTimelinessLien ClaimsHeld Harmless
References
4
Case No. ADJ2664628 (MON 0192129) ADJ3433059 (MON 0117435) ADJ3492686 (MON 0174315) ADJ3519577 (MON 0117436) ADJ3629755 (MON 0210291) ADJ3759663 (MON 0069692) ADJ4060215 (MON 0117437)
Regular
Mar 18, 2019

FAHMY ATTIA vs. GTE CORPORATION, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves applicant Fahmy Attia's petition for reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR). The Appeals Board denied reconsideration on the merits, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. Despite a defective service of the OACR by the WCJ, the Board treated the petition as timely filed and accepted a supplemental filing from the applicant. Ultimately, the Board found that the OACR validly settled all of the applicant's claims, including future medical care.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDGTE CORPORATIONACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANYSEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESPetition for Reconsiderationworkers’ compensation administrative law judgeWCJOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseOACRdefective service
References
0
Case No. ADJ7491926 ADJ7174640
Regular
Apr 22, 2011

JACQUELIN ESCALANTE vs. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, PMA GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) that settled applicant's back injury claim for $5,150.00. The Board found the applicant's petition for reconsideration was timely because service of the OACR was defective due to an incorrect address. Consequently, the OACR was rescinded, and the case is returned to the trial level to determine if the compromise should be reinstated, requiring the applicant to show grounds like fraud or mistake.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseIndustrial InjuryDefective ServiceTimelinessRescindedTrial LevelEquitableFraud
References
6
Case No. ADJ2214463 (VNO 0522433)
Regular
Feb 19, 2009

RICARDO DUARTE PONCE vs. ROSS STORES, INC., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to set aside the Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR). The defendant sought to vacate the OACR because the parties' settlement agreement, which included a Medicare Set Aside (MSA) allocation, was contingent on approval by the Centers for Medicare Services (CMS) that was never obtained. Since the applicant was a Medicare beneficiary and the settlement exceeded $25,000, federal regulations require CMS approval of the MSA. The Board rescinded the OACR and returned the matter for further proceedings.

Medicare Set AsideMSA allocationCenters for Medicare ServicesCMS approvalCompromise and ReleaseOACRPetition for ReconsiderationRescind OrderGood CauseEquitable Grounds
References
8
Case No. ADJ234762, MON 0356645, ADJ2358121, MON 0356646, ADJ2518900, MON 0356647, ADJ3669155, VNO 0479411, ADJ684024, VNO 0479412, ADJ806318, VNO 0547904
Regular
Aug 20, 2013

DALILA CHOTO vs. LSG SKYCHEFS, LIBERTY MUTUAL

The WCAB granted reconsideration to review an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) where a C&R settled claims for $87,000. The applicant seeks to set aside the OACR and strike a clause stating the defendant is not held harmless for treatment outside the MPN, alleging its inclusion was a mistake. The Board vacated the OACR, returning the case for a hearing on the settlement's adequacy by a new WCJ. One Commissioner dissented, arguing the applicant signed the C&R acknowledging understanding and that inadvertence is insufficient grounds to vacate.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseMPNmedical liensinadvertencemistakeneglectvacateadequacy
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 185 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