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
Jun 09, 2011

In re the Certification as Qualified Adoptive Parents Pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 115-d

This case concerns Joanna K. and Scottye K.'s application to waive the mandatory certification as qualified adoptive parents for Jeremiah B., the biological son of Careese B. The K.s received physical custody of Jeremiah shortly after his birth in March 2009, prior to obtaining the required judicial certification, thereby violating New York's adoption statute. The court reviewed the convoluted history, including Careese B.'s judicial consent to adoption and the K.s' temporary custody order. However, the court denied the waiver application, emphasizing the critical importance of pre-placement certification to protect children and prevent unregulated transfers of custody. The decision stated that the petitioners failed to show good cause for waiver and that a retroactive approval of non-compliance would undermine legislative intent, although the K.s retain legal and physical custody pending the adoption petition.

Adoption Law CompliancePrivate-Placement Adoption RequirementsPre-Placement CertificationWaiver Application DenialChild Welfare LegislationFamily Law ProcedureJudicial DiscretionStatutory InterpretationParental Fitness StandardsCustody Transfer
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Drake Bakeries Inc. v. Local 50, American Bakery & Confectionery Workers International

Plaintiff Drake Bakeries, Incorporated, initiated a lawsuit to recover damages for an alleged breach of a "no-strike provision" within a collective bargaining agreement, pursuant to Section 301(a) of the Labor-Management Relations Act. The defendant subsequently filed a motion to stay the trial, seeking to compel arbitration as outlined in the collective bargaining agreement and permitted by the United States Arbitration Act. The plaintiff opposed this motion, arguing that the arbitration provision was permissive, that the union waived its arbitration rights by striking, and that the defendants had waived their rights by failing to initiate arbitration. The Court, however, found no merit in the plaintiff's arguments, concluding that the arbitration provisions were mandatory, a breach of contract does not automatically waive arbitration rights, and the defendants did not waive their rights since the plaintiff, as the aggrieved party, had not attempted to initiate arbitration. Consequently, the Court enforced the arbitration agreement and granted the defendant's motion to stay further proceedings in the suit.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementNo-Strike ClauseStay of ProceedingsLabor-Management Relations ActUnited States Arbitration ActContract EnforcementWaiverGrievance ProcedureMandatory Arbitration
References
4
Case No. ADJ3887642 (MON 0244638) ADJ2350388 (MON 0241177)
Regular
Feb 04, 2010

MARION BARNES vs. JOHN RIORDAN PLUMBING, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

The California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a prior order finding that the defendant waived its claim for credit of overpaid temporary disability indemnity. This waiver occurred because the defendant failed to challenge a previous WCJ order from July 2009 that determined the issue had already been waived. The Board affirmed that the July 2009 order was a final order because it determined a substantive right of the parties. Therefore, the defendant could not relitigate this waived issue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Insurance Guarantee Associationliquidationcovered claimscredit for overpaymenttemporary disability indemnitywaiverfinal ordersubstantive rightreconsideration
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 10, 1982

American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Roberts

ABC, a telecommunications company, was cited for violating Labor Law § 162(3) for not providing a second meal period to employees working specific shifts. ABC challenged the violation, arguing the law did not apply to their industry or skilled workers, and that their collective bargaining agreement waived or substantially complied with the requirement. The Industrial Board of Appeals affirmed the violation, but Special Term annulled this decision, concluding that employees could waive the statutory meal period benefit through their labor contracts. The current court's majority affirmed Special Term's judgment. A dissenting opinion argued that Labor Law § 162(3) is a public policy health measure designed for worker protection and therefore cannot be waived by private agreements or collective bargaining, emphasizing that the statute's 'every person' language applies broadly.

Labor LawMeal PeriodsWaiver of Statutory RightsCollective Bargaining AgreementPublic PolicyTelecommunications IndustryIndustrial CommissionerIndustrial Board of AppealsAppellate ReviewDissenting Opinion
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Estate of Castiglia

In this Surrogate's Court proceeding, the decedent's spouse sought to remove restrictions from her limited letters of administration to access settlement funds from a personal injury claim. The core issue revolved around the calculation of attorney's fees in a settlement where an insurance carrier both paid "fresh money" and waived its workers' compensation lien. The court critically examined the precedent set in *Matter of Purtill*, finding its approach to fee calculation overly broad. This decision clarifies that when an insurance carrier waives its lien, the true settlement value for attorney's fee computation should include the fresh money plus two-thirds of the waived lien, ensuring the attorney's fee for the lien portion is not solely borne by the client, consistent with Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (1). The application was granted, with the attorney's fees and disbursements modified according to this clarified methodology.

Workers' CompensationAttorney's FeesSettlement ProceedsLien WaiverSurrogate's CourtLetters of AdministrationEstate LawNew York LawInsurance LawPersonal Injury Claim
References
3
Case No. ADJ9090412
Regular
Nov 21, 2014

, Applicant, , ABDUR SIKDER vs. , Defendants. LUXOR CAB COMPANY INC.; GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the judge's decision for a replacement QME panel. The defendant argued the applicant waived his right to a new panel by not objecting during the examination with Dr. Carpenter. The majority found that removal was not warranted as the defendant did not demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Commissioner Lowe dissented, arguing the applicant waived his right to object under the relevant rules by failing to do so during the examination.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelChiropracticLabor Code Section 4062.1WCJAdministrative Law JudgeGood CauseUnrepresented EmployeeTimeliness of Objection
References
2
Case No. ADJ2709854 (OXN 0142376) ADJ1143803 (OXN 0128653)
Regular
Mar 09, 2012

SALVADOR PAZ vs. ARM CONTRACTORS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order awarding applicant's attorney $8,018.30 in litigation costs. Defendant Ace American Insurance Company argued the attorney waived the claim and they were denied an opportunity to contest the costs. The Board found that while the attorney did not waive the claim, the defendant is entitled to due process. Therefore, the order awarding costs was rescinded, and the matter was returned to the trial level for a hearing on the defendant's objections.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJoint Order Re: CostsLienAttorney's LienLabor Code Section 5815Labor Code Section 5313Due ProcessIndustrial InjuriesCumulative Trauma
References
0
Case No. ADJ1952983
Regular
Mar 15, 2018

JUAN RIVERA vs. IMPORT EXPORT CACTUS, STATE COMPENSAITON INSURANCE FUND

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought reconsideration of a prior ruling that deemed them to have waived objections to a specific invoice from lien claimant Scandoc Imaging. The WCAB denied reconsideration, finding that the defendant's objection, if any, was untimely, having been filed approximately four years after the invoice was submitted. California regulations require objections to medical-legal billings within 60 days to avoid waiver. Therefore, the defendant waived their objections to the reasonableness of the services and charges for invoice #234447-3.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Orderslien claimantinvoice objectionwaiver of objectionreasonableness of servicesLabor Code section 4622Scandoc ImagingImport Export Cactus
References
2
Case No. ADJ8529720
Regular
Feb 06, 2017

ALEJANDRA GONZALEZ vs. 3M COMPANY, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE

This case concerns whether an untimely supplemental Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) report warrants a replacement panel. The applicant requested a new panel because the original QME's supplemental report was late. The WCJ denied the defendant's request to keep the original QME, finding the defendant waived objection by striking a name from the new panel. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and remanded the case. The Board clarified that striking a name from a new panel does not automatically waive the right to object to its validity.

PQMESupplemental ReportReplacement PanelLabor Code 4062.5DWC Medical UnitDeclaration of ReadinessMSCWaiverAdministrative Director Rule 38Rule 31.5
References
0
Case No. ADJ9040755
Regular
Apr 26, 2018

JUAN MARTINEZ vs. AREVALO LANDSCAPING SERVICE, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claimant, Citywide Scanning Service, seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) finding that their services were valued at $\$2,091.61$. The lien claimant argued that the defendant waived objections by failing to submit timely explanations of review (EORs) and that their billing was supported by evidence, entitling them to penalties. The WCAB denied reconsideration, finding that the issue of timely EORs was waived as it was not raised at the initial trial. The only remaining issue for trial was the reasonable value of the services, and the WCAB upheld the administrative law judge's determination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFinding and OrderExplanation of Review (EOR)Reasonableness and NecessityLachesPhotocopy ServicesCompromise and ReleaseLien Trial
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 610 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