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. ADJ6622890
Regular
Mar 10, 2014

GIOVANNA MUNOZ vs. MARY ADAMS COLLINS, ALLSTATE, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Western Imaging's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely. The Board found that Western Imaging's claim of non-receipt of the Order Dismissing Lien Claim was insufficient to overcome the presumption of service created by the defendant's proof of service and the ordinary course of mail. Even if Western Imaging's declaration were considered, the Board found credible evidence that they did, in fact, receive the order. Due to the untimeliness, the Board lacked jurisdiction to consider the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationProof of ServiceRebuttable PresumptionOrdinary Course of MailUntimelyJurisdictionLien ClaimWCABAdministrative Law JudgeWestern Imaging
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp. v. Service Employees International Union

Plaintiff Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corporation (OTB) moved for summary judgment, seeking to define its job security obligations, declare defendant's interference with 'interface' illegal, and obtain a permanent injunction. Defendant Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 235 (Local 235) cross-moved for summary judgment, requesting dismissal of the complaint and an order compelling OTB to negotiate a job security agreement. The central issue revolved around whether the Off-Track Pari-Mutuel Betting Law allowed OTB to unilaterally establish job security provisions or mandated bilateral negotiation with the union. The court concluded that legislative intent and regulations (9 NYCRR 5203.5) required bilaterally negotiated agreements. Consequently, the court denied OTB's motion and granted Local 235's cross-motion, ordering OTB to negotiate a job security agreement.

Job SecurityOff-Track Betting LawPari-Mutuel BettingCollective BargainingSummary JudgmentUnion RightsStatutory InterpretationRacing and Wagering BoardLabor DisputeNegotiated Agreements
References
11
Case No. 120 AD3d 1323
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 2014

Tara N.P. v. Western Suffolk Board of Cooperative Educational Services

The plaintiff, Tara N.P., commenced an action to recover damages for personal injuries after being sexually assaulted by Larry I. Smith, a level three sex offender, at a facility where she was attending a GED course. Smith was referred to the facility by the Suffolk County Department of Labor as part of a 'welfare to work' program, despite an agreement that the facility would not accept individuals with criminal records. The Department of Labor allegedly failed to disclose Smith's criminal background. The appellants (County of Suffolk, Suffolk County Department of Social Services, and Suffolk County Department of Labor) moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims against them, asserting governmental immunity. The Supreme Court denied their motion. The Appellate Division modified the order, granting summary judgment to the appellants on the complaint against them, finding no special duty owed to the plaintiff. However, the Court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the cross-claims, citing a triable issue of fact as to whether the appellants breached a duty of care to NACEC.

Personal InjuryGovernmental ImmunitySpecial DutySummary JudgmentContribution ClaimSex OffenderNegligenceDepartment of LaborSexual AssaultAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Plaintiff Volt Technical Services Corp. applied for H-2 visas for nuclear start-up technicians, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) denied, asserting the need was permanent, not temporary. After the denial was affirmed on appeal, Volt filed suit, alleging the INS's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the INS's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act § 101(a)(15)(H)(ii), which requires the employer's need for services to be temporary, not just the individual assignments. Finding that Volt demonstrated a recurring need for such technicians over several years, the court granted the INS's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Volt's.

Immigration LawH-2 visasNonimmigrant WorkersTemporary EmploymentImmigration and Nationality ActAdministrative Procedures ActDeclaratory Judgment ActAgency InterpretationJudicial ReviewNuclear Industry
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Americredit Financial Services, Inc. v. Oxford Management Services

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (AmeriCredit) commenced an action to confirm an arbitration award against Oxford Management Services (OMS). OMS cross-moved to vacate the award, alleging the arbitrator exceeded his powers by dismissing a counterclaim and manifestly disregarded the law. The arbitrator had dismissed OMS's counterclaim for spoilation of evidence. The Court affirmed the arbitrator's decision, finding he did not exceed his authority under the RSA by dismissing the counterclaim or by interpreting the contract terms regarding account termination. The Court also found no manifest disregard for the law, concluding the arbitrator's decision was rationally supported by the record. Consequently, AmeriCredit's motion to confirm the award was granted, and OMS's motion to vacate was denied.

Arbitration Award ConfirmationArbitration Award VacaturFederal Arbitration ActManifest Disregard of LawArbitrator PowersSpoilation of EvidenceContract InterpretationCollection Agency DisputeSummary ProceedingJudicial Review of Arbitration
References
41
Case No. ADJ8912546
Regular
Jan 19, 2016

CARLOS CASTRO, CARLOS CASTRO VICENTE vs. MURANAKA FARMS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claim by Western Imaging Services for photocopying services rendered to applicant's attorney. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinding the initial findings. The WCAB held that Western Imaging Services is exempt from professional photocopier registration requirements under Business and Professions Code section 22451(b) because it acted as an independent contractor for the applicant's attorney, a member of the State Bar. The WCAB also admitted the attorney's letter confirming this independent contractor status into evidence, finding it substantial evidence for Western's claim.

Professional photocopierBusiness and Professions Code section 22451Independent contractorMember of the State BarLien claimantPetition for reconsiderationPetition for removalWCJ reportCompromise and ReleaseMedical-legal expenses
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2003

Almonte v. Western Beef, Inc.

Ramon Almonte was injured in a workplace accident involving a garbage compactor and received workers’ compensation benefits as an employee of Western Beef, Inc. He and his wife later sued Western Beef, Western Beef Retail, Inc., and Western Beef-Metropolitan Avenue, Inc., for personal injuries. Western Beef was dismissed due to workers' compensation exclusivity. Western Beef Retail and Western Beef-Metropolitan Avenue, Inc. moved for summary judgment, arguing worker's compensation bar or corporate dissolution, respectively. The Supreme Court denied their motion. On appeal, the order was modified to grant summary judgment for Western Beef-Metropolitan Avenue, Inc., as it was dissolved before the accident. The denial of summary judgment for Western Beef Retail was affirmed, as its alter ego argument was not properly raised and lacked sufficient evidence.

Personal injurySummary judgmentCorporate dissolutionAlter ego doctrineEmployer liabilityAppellate reviewConsolidated actionWorkplace accidentGarbage compactorExclusivity defense
References
10
Case No. ADJ6733204
Regular
Aug 11, 2014

MARIA TORRES vs. MAG INSTRUMENTS, INC.; PACIFIC COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in this case. The lien claimant, Western Imaging Services, failed to present any evidence at the lien trial to support its claim for reimbursement for medical-legal services. Specifically, no evidence was introduced to establish Western Imaging Services' status as a licensed professional photocopier or its exemption from licensing requirements under Business and Professions Code §22451(b). The Board adopted the WCJ's report, emphasizing that merely filing a document does not constitute evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantBusiness and Professions CodeProfessional PhotocopierLicensing RequirementMedical-Legal ServicesBurden of ProofWCJ ReportState Bar Exemption
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brentwood Pain & Rehabilitation Services, P.C. v. Allstate Insurance

This opinion addresses whether Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) procedures are subject to the same fee limitations as X-rays under New York's no-fault auto insurance law. Plaintiffs, a group of MRI service providers ("Providers"), argued that applying x-ray fee schedules to MRIs is improper and violates insurance contracts. Defendants, numerous insurance companies ("Insurers"), along with the New York State Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) and Department of Insurance (DOI), contended that the fee limitations for multiple diagnostic x-ray procedures (Ground Rule 3 of the WCB Fee Schedule) should also apply to MRIs. The court, deferring to the interpretations of the WCB and DOI, found their application of Ground Rule 3 to MRIs to be reasonable. Consequently, the court granted the Insurers' motion for summary judgment, denied the Providers' cross-motion for summary judgment, and denied the Providers' motion for class certification as moot.

MRIX-rayNo-Fault InsuranceFee ScheduleWorkers' Compensation BoardDepartment of InsuranceRegulatory InterpretationSummary JudgmentClass ActionDiagnostic Imaging
References
35
Case No. ADJ6669630
Regular
Jul 23, 2018

ROBERT SAXTON vs. SELECT A SERVICE RETAIL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision regarding a lien claim by Western Imaging Services for copying services. The WCAB found that for most invoices, the defendant waived objections to reasonableness due to untimely and invalid objections. However, the WCAB noted potential issues with two specific invoices (82003-7 and 82003-8) and deferred the final determination of reimbursement for these and other contested invoices. The matter was returned to the administrative law judge for further proceedings on the validity of those specific invoices.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeReimbursementFee ScheduleObjectionsInvoicesReasonable and Necessary
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 7,276 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