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
Nov 08, 1978

In re Mycuta A.

This case involves a juvenile respondent who admitted to acts constituting assault in the third degree. A dispositional hearing was held in Bronx County Family Court to determine the applicability of amendments to Family Court Act Section 756, which became effective on September 1, 1978. The court addressed two primary legal questions: first, whether the revised one-year maximum initial placement for misdemeanor acts applied, and second, whether the provisions for direct placement into a secure facility by the Family Court were applicable. The court ruled that both amended provisions applied to the respondent, as the adjudication occurred after the amendment's effective date. Consequently, the respondent was placed with the Division for Youth for one year, with the Division authorized to place her directly into a secure facility if deemed appropriate.

Juvenile DelinquencyFamily Court ActPlacementSecure FacilityMisdemeanorEx Post FactoStatutory InterpretationDivision for YouthBronx County Family CourtDispositional Hearing
References
1
Case No. ADJ4343203
Regular
Feb 06, 2015

PEDRO CABALLERO (DECEASED) vs. CONTINENTAL PUMPING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a deceased applicant whose death was determined by an Agreed Medical Evaluator to be unrelated to his industrial injury. The defendant sought dismissal of the claim, but the WCJ initially included a provision requiring all liens to be resolved first. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no statutory basis to delay dismissal pending lien resolution, especially since lien claimants were properly served and did not object. The Board amended the Notice of Intent to Dismiss, removing the lien resolution requirement, and ordered the Application for Adjudication of Claim dismissed.

Petition for RemovalSkeletal PetitionNotice of Intent to DismissAgreed Medical EvaluatorDismissal for Failure to ProsecuteLien ClaimantsApplication for Adjudication of ClaimWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryCause of Death
References
0
Case No. ADJ1054155 (LAO 0854446) ADJ1247741 (LAO 0854447) ADJ1895803 (LAO 0854448)
Regular
May 03, 2011

HIRITI OKUAMICHAEL vs. PAUL OWENS SHOES INC., STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This amended order clarifies that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the February 8, 2011 Findings and Awards. This reconsideration aims to allow the Board to thoroughly study the factual and legal issues, including those to be raised in the applicant's supplemental petition. The applicant's request to file a supplemental petition has also been granted and reaffirmed. All future communications regarding these cases should be directed to the Office of the Commissioners of the WCAB.

Supplemental PetitionReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10848Findings and AwardsDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersWCABADJ1054155ADJ1247741ADJ1895803
References
0
Case No. ADJ13475083
Regular
Feb 28, 2025

Miguel Garcia Perez vs. Opportunity Staffing, Inc.

Applicant Miguel Garcia Perez and defendant Opportunity Staffing, Inc. both sought reconsideration of a "Second Amended Findings and Award" from November 26, 2024. The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration and denied the defendant's, also affirming the "Second Amended Findings and Award" with specific amendments. Key issues included applicant's earnings, temporary disability period, supplemental job displacement benefits, attorney's fees, and apportionment. The Board found the WCJ erred in not honoring the parties' stipulation of applicant being a maximum earner, deferred the issues of temporary disability length and attorney's fees for further development, and determined the defendant failed to meet the burden of proof for apportionment under Labor Code sections 4664 and 4663.

StipulationMaximum EarnerApportionmentTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityAttorney's FeesPetition for ReconsiderationLabor CodeMedical EvidenceCausation
References
17
Case No. ADJ6958416
Regular
May 19, 2011

Norma Zell vs. ALAMEDA COUNTY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's first petition for reconsideration, amending the original award to increase her permanent disability rating from 20% to 24% based on corrected medical calculations. The Board denied the applicant's second petition for reconsideration regarding her left wrist injury, adopting the judge's reasoning that it was not a compensable industrial injury. The original finding of a cumulative industrial injury to the right wrist during her employment as a deputy sheriff was affirmed. The award was amended to reflect the 24% permanent disability rating and adjusted attorney fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative Industrial InjuryRight Wrist InjuryDeputy SheriffPermanent Disability RatingAMA GuideWhole Person ImpairmentPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardDecision After Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. ADJ9364839
Regular
Dec 15, 2016

AARON TELLEZ GIRON vs. NATIONAL STORES, INC.; THE HARTFORD, Administered By GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration and granted the applicant's petition. The Board affirmed the original finding of industrial back injury but amended a finding to state the applicant's claim is not barred by the post-termination defense (Labor Code §3600(a)(10)). The case is returned to the trial level for adjudication of all other issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryLabor Code Section 3600(a)(10)Post-Termination DefensePetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderDecision After ReconsiderationLoss Prevention District ManagerBack InjuryReporting Injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ9084481
Regular
Dec 06, 2017

AMAURY TELEMACO vs. PHILADELPHIA PHILLIES, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS, VIRGINIA SURETY COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's finding of no subject matter jurisdiction, acknowledging that the applicant played 19 games in California during his baseball career. However, the Board intends to find that this minimal connection, absent a hiring in California, does not create a substantial and legitimate interest for California to adjudicate the claim under the *Johnson* due process standard. The Board will allow further briefing on the application of *Johnson* and the relevant statutory amendment regarding professional athletes.

Subject Matter JurisdictionLabor Code section 3600.5(a)Labor Code section 5305Hiring in CaliforniaCumulative InjuryConstitutional Due ProcessFederal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)Substantial and Legitimate ConnectionProfessional Baseball PlayerInjurious Exposure
References
9
Case No. ADJ2524386 (LAO 0803654) ADJ2571077 (LAO 0803655)
Regular
Oct 02, 2020

RAUL MARINO vs. COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES, BROADSPIRE

This case concerns a minor amendment to an already approved Compromise and Release agreement between Raul Marino and Coca-Cola Enterprises. The defendant sought to increase the net payment to the applicant by $47.14 and correct the date of injury for one of the cases. The applicant agreed to these changes, and the Board found them to be in the applicant's best interest. Consequently, the Board amended its previous decision to incorporate these agreed-upon modifications.

Compromise and ReleaseAmendmentNet Amount PayableDate of InjuryReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSelf-InsuredApplicantDefendantOpinion and Order
References
0
Case No. ADJ11780107
Regular
Feb 15, 2023

CLAUDIA NITO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES, INTERCARE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision. The Board found the applicant's December 20, 2018 Amended Application for Adjudication of Claim was a valid filing against IHSS, even with its informalities. Furthermore, the Board agreed that the applicant's claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The defendant's contention of an inaccurate service address on the amended application was dismissed as a new issue raised on reconsideration and factually disproven.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDenialAdjudication NumberIn-Home Supportive ServicesLegally UninsuredAmended ApplicationStatute of LimitationsLabor Code § 5405Cumulative Trauma
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 09, 2002

Saunders v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

This case involves an order and judgment from the Supreme Court, New York County, concerning a proceeding under CPLR article 78. The petition was granted to the extent of enjoining the respondent from appointing temporary employees in disregard of Civil Service Law § 64 (1) and directing an amendment to its policy regarding Civil Service Law § 75 (1) (c) to include part-time employees. However, the application for lost wages and benefits on behalf of petitioner Patino was denied. The court unanimously affirmed the decision, stating that the injunctive relief was properly granted as the respondent failed to articulate an important need for open-ended temporary employment consistent with Civil Service Law. The court also rejected the argument that Civil Service Law § 75 (1) (c) applies only to full-time employees, affirming that no hearing was required for Patino's termination under the applicable collective bargaining agreements.

Temporary EmployeesCivil Service LawInjunctive ReliefPart-time EmployeesLost WagesCollective Bargaining AgreementsTerminationPublic PolicyJudicial ReviewAdministrative Law
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 15,513 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