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
Apr 12, 1990

Commissioners of State Insurance Fund v. Valenzano

The Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund initiated an action against Marcello Valenzano, doing business as ABC Contracting Co., for unpaid workers' compensation insurance premiums. The defendant failed to comply with discovery requests, leading to an order conditionally striking his answer and later, a default judgment. Defendant's pro se motion to vacate the default judgment, asserting non-receipt of documents and partial compliance, was denied by the IAS court. The court found service proper and noted the defendant's failure to demonstrate a meritorious defense. The appellate court affirmed the decision, finding the lower court acted within its discretion to strike the answer for willful failure to comply with discovery, considering the lack of reasonable excuse and meritorious defense.

Default JudgmentDiscovery SanctionsFailure to ComplyWorkers' Compensation InsuranceVacate JudgmentMeritorious DefenseService of ProcessAppellate ReviewCivil ProcedureSupreme Court
References
3
Case No. ADJ8596014
Regular
Nov 07, 2018

DION GEORGE vs. KJI PLUMBING, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a $\$ 750$ sanction imposed by a WCJ against defense counsel and KJI Plumbing for defense counsel's failure to appear at a hearing. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the failure to appear was due to defense counsel's negligence, not willful misconduct. Consequently, the Board reduced the sanction to $\$ 250$ and removed KJI Plumbing as a liable party, solely sanctioning defense counsel and his law office. The Board cautioned that future failures to appear could establish a pattern justifying larger sanctions.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsWCJDefense CounselJointly and SeverallyUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of ReadinessLabor Code § 5813WCAB Rule 10561
References
0
Case No. ADJ928027
Regular
Feb 03, 2016

DAVID TRINH vs. TZENG LONG USA, INC., BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

This case involves the suspension of Mike Traw's privilege to appear before the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) under Labor Code Section 4907. The WCAB issued a Notice of Intention to suspend due to non-payment of sanctions and failure to respond. While Professional Lien Services, Inc. (PLS) sought extensions, neither Traw nor PLS provided a substantive response. Consequently, Traw's appearance privilege is suspended for ninety days due to his failure to comply with the WCAB's orders. Further action against PLS may occur if ordered sanctions remain unpaid.

Labor Code Section 4907Decision After RemovalNotice of IntentionSuspension of PrivilegeProfessional Lien ServicesMike TrawAppeals Board En BancSanction OrderInterference with Judicial ProcessWCAB
References
0
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 08300 [145 AD3d 492]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 08, 2016

Netzahuall v. All Will LLC

This case concerns an appeal regarding the denial of defendant Lime Light's cross-motion to dismiss common-law indemnification claims brought by defendant All Will LLC. The plaintiff, Gabriel Netzahuall, an employee of Lime Light, sustained injuries but not a "grave injury" as defined by Workers' Compensation Law § 11. Although the Workers' Compensation Board previously determined Lime Light to be the plaintiff's employer, the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's finding that All Will, the premises owner, was not collaterally estopped from challenging this determination. The court reasoned that All Will was not a party to the prior Workers' Compensation proceeding and therefore did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue of plaintiff's employer.

indemnificationcollateral estoppelWorkers' Compensation Lawemployer-employee relationshipgrave injurypremises liabilityappellate practicestatutory interpretationprivity of partieslitigation opportunity
References
4
Case No. 86 Civ. 3028 (JMC)
Regular Panel Decision

ILGWU National Retirement Fund v. Empire State Mills Corp.

The International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union National Retirement Fund and its trustees (plaintiffs) sued Empire State Mills Corporation (defendant) for unpaid withdrawal liability under ERISA and the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act. A default judgment was entered against Empire in October 1986. Empire subsequently moved to set aside the default, citing fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake, arguing it believed an oral settlement existed or that its pro se telephone contact constituted an appearance. The District Court, presided over by Judge Cannella, denied Empire's motion. The court found Empire's failure to appear willful and ruled that its defenses were waived due to its failure to initiate arbitration within the statutory period, as required by the MPPAA.

Withdrawal LiabilityERISAMPPAADefault JudgmentRule 60(b)ArbitrationExhaustion of Administrative RemediesMultiemployer Pension PlanFiduciary DutyPro Se Representation
References
21
Case No. ADJ10044579
Regular
Dec 20, 2017

NEVITA BAILEY vs. FIRST GROUP AMERICA, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant filed a Petition for Removal after the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss due to the applicant's failure to appear at a Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC). The ALJ's notice stipulated dismissal unless the applicant appeared at a rescheduled MSC, which was subsequently taken off calendar due to the removal petition. The Appeals Board denied removal, finding no substantial prejudice as the applicant's failure to appear at the rescheduled MSC was rendered moot by the rescheduling. The Board also noted that a Notice of Intent to Dismiss should not be issued for a *potential* future failure to appear, but rather based on an actual occurrence.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMandatory Settlement ConferenceAdministrative Law JudgeNotice of Intent to DismissWCAB Rule 10563WCAB Rule 10562substantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsideration
References
2
Case No. ADJ7073544
Regular
Sep 06, 2016

OMAR NUNEZ vs. PETROCHEM INSULATION, INC., AIG CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior dismissal of Omar Nunez's case. The WCAB found that the dismissal for failure to appear at trial violated Nunez's due process rights because no specific Notice of Intention to Dismiss (NIT) was issued for his non-appearance. The prior NIT addressed failure to prosecute, not failure to appear, thus depriving Nunez of an opportunity to object. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DismissFailure to AppearDue ProcessWCAB RulesDismissal Without PrejudiceFailure to ProsecuteViolation of RulesRescind OrderReturn to Trial Level
References
0
Case No. ADJ171587
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

MARCUS VASQUEZ vs. MARION RESIDENCE, FIREMANS FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of an administrative law judge's order suspending Integrated Healthcare Recovery Services (IHRS) from appearing before the board. This suspension stemmed from IHRS's failure to pay a $1,000 sanction previously imposed for missing a lien trial. The WCAB has now issued a notice of intent to suspend IHRS unless the sanction is paid within 20 days, citing IHRS's failure to comply with a final order as good cause. IHRS may avoid suspension by paying the sanction or demonstrating good cause to the WCAB.

Labor Code Section 4907Petition for ReconsiderationSuspension of AppearanceWCABWCJSanction OrderLien TrialFinal OrderFailure to PayHearing Representative
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Madison County Commissioner of Social Services ex rel. Chafee v. Felker

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order that found the respondent in willful violation of a child support order. The respondent, the father of a son born in 2002, failed to pay $25 per week in child support to Mary Chafee, as mandated by a May 2007 order. The Family Court affirmed the Support Magistrate's finding of willful violation and imposed a sentence of incarceration, conditional upon payment of $3,650 in arrears. The appellate court rejected the respondent's arguments, including his inability to pay due to lack of income and his claim regarding the $500 arrears cap, citing a lack of credible evidence and his failure to seek modification of the original support order. Consequently, the Family Court's determination was affirmed.

Child SupportWillful ViolationArrearsFamily Court ActParental ObligationContempt of CourtAbility to PayModification of SupportAppeal DecisionSupport Magistrate
References
9
Case No. ADJ2829894 (SRO 0138997)
Regular
Apr 18, 2011

CAROL LYNN RANDALL vs. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding a prior order that closed discovery and intended sanctions. This arose from defense counsel's claimed failure to receive notice of a mandatory settlement conference, preventing their appearance and due process. The Board allowed the defendant to file a pretrial conference statement, will allow a trial on the merits regarding indemnity payments, and will address sanctions separately. The trial date was continued to allow for these proceedings.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDue ProcessSanctionsEAMSStipulation and AwardIndemnity PaymentsPretrial Conference StatementWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 4,798 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