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

Claim of Colas, ex rel. Bermudez v. Watermain

A worker was killed at her workplace by a former romantic partner who was also a coworker, leading to a claim for workers' compensation death benefits. The Workers' Compensation Board denied the claim, ruling that the death did not arise out of employment, as it was motivated by personal animosity between the decedent and her assailant. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, finding that the employer successfully rebutted the presumption of compensability for unwitnessed workplace deaths by presenting substantial evidence of a personal animosity motive, stemming from the decedent's recent separation from her assailant and documented threats.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsPersonal AnimosityWorkplace ViolencePresumption of CompensabilityRebuttal of PresumptionDomestic ViolenceAppellate ReviewCausationEmployment-Related Injury
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Rosen v. First Manhattan Bank

The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that the death of a claimant's decedent was a compensable accident, a decision appealed by the employer. The decedent was murdered by a coemployee, Roger Proano, before their shift began. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board found the fatal assault arose out of and in the course of employment, relying on Workers’ Compensation Law § 21's presumption of compensability. The employer argued the assault stemmed from personal animosity, citing Proano's explanation, but the Board deemed Proano not credible based on a police detective's opinion. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding the death occurred in the course of employment and the employer failed to overcome the presumption of compensability due to the lack of credible evidence of personal animosity, maintaining a nexus between the assault and employment as they were coemployees.

Workplace AssaultCompensable AccidentCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentWorkers' Compensation Law § 21Presumption of CompensabilityCoemployee ViolenceCredibility DeterminationPersonal AnimosityDeath Benefits
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2006

Ruiz v. Griffin

Old Navy, Inc. appealed an order denying its motion for summary judgment as premature in a wrongful death action. The Supreme Court, Orange County, affirmed the order, concluding that the plaintiffs were entitled to further discovery before a ruling on summary judgment could be made. Additionally, the court rejected Old Navy's argument that the action was precluded by the Workers' Compensation Law, finding that the assault on the decedent by Kevin Griffin was not work-related as it stemmed from personal animosity rather than work-related differences.

Wrongful DeathSummary JudgmentReargumentAppellate ProcedureFailure to ProsecuteDiscoveryWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityWork-Related AssaultPersonal AnimosityPremature Motion
References
18
Case No. ADJ107733
Regular
May 03, 2011

ALFREDO GUTIERREZ vs. VIKING COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition to disqualify Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) James Hopkins. The applicant's attorney claimed the ALJ demonstrated animosity and bias by stating the case was rescheduled "Because, it's you" when referring to the attorney. Although the ALJ cited administrative difficulties, he did not deny making the statement. The WCAB found this statement sufficient to establish an appearance of bias, warranting disqualification. The case will be reset for trial before a different ALJ, with priority given due to the repeated postponements.

Petition for DisqualificationWCJ biasappearance of biasattorney biasLabor Code section 5311mandatory settlement conferencedouble bookedanimosity and gamesmanshipprocedural historyexpedited hearings
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Wilson v. Mills

Claimant, a general mechanic, filed for workers' compensation benefits after being struck in the face by a coworker. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board found the assault arose from work-related differences, crediting the claimant's testimony. The Board concluded there was a sufficient nexus between the assault and employment, despite elements of personal animosity and allegations of harassment. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier appealed the decision. The appellate court affirmed the Board's finding, emphasizing that the test for compensability requires a work-related origin for the assault, which is a question of fact for the Board.

Workers' CompensationAssaultWork-Related InjuryNexus to EmploymentPersonal AnimosityEmployer LiabilityBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewCredibility DeterminationGeneral Mechanic
References
5
Case No. ADJ3046670 (POM 234030) ADJ3251524 (POM 0179393
Regular
Sep 03, 2014

CAROL ALLISON vs. MERTZ DEL AMO MOBILE ESTATES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal petitions from both applicant Carol Allison and defendant CIGA, rescinding prior orders concerning an independent medical examination and trial setting. The case is returned to the Marina Del Rey District Office for a conference before the Presiding Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge. This conference aims to address the case's complex procedural and substantive issues, which may stem from address errors, service defects, multiple judges, or attorney animosity. CIGA's petition for sanctions against the applicant was denied without prejudice.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDCIGAPETITIONS FOR REMOVALDECISION AFTER REMOVALindependent medical examinerPERMANENT DISABILITYSTATUTE OF LIMITATIONSPROCEDURAL ISSUESDEFECTIVE FILINGSERVICE OF PAPERS
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2009

Claim of Cuthbert v. Panorama Windows Ltd.

Claimant, a purchasing clerk, sought workers' compensation benefits after being assaulted by a coworker. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially awarded benefits, finding the assault originated from work-related differences. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this decision, concluding there was a sufficient nexus between the employment relationship and the assault, despite a history of personal animosity and racial slurs between the individuals. The Board relied on the plant manager's credible testimony, which indicated the claimant's workplace attitude created tension. The appellate court subsequently affirmed the Board's decision, finding no error in their determination of a work-related nexus for the assault.

AssaultWorkplace InjuryWorkers' CompensationEmployment NexusCoworker DisputeRacial DiscriminationBoard AffirmationAppellate ReviewCredibilityPlant Manager Testimony
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 31, 1979

Claim of Arrington v. Schneider

The Workers’ Compensation Board found that a building superintendent’s injuries, resulting from an assault by his brother on the employment premises, were compensable. The assault occurred during working hours over a dispute regarding janitorial duties and money, with the employer aware of the brother's prior assistance. On appeal, the court affirmed the Board’s decision, holding that there was substantial evidentiary support for the finding that the assault stemmed from work-connected differences rather than purely personal animosity. The court reiterated that any slender nexus between the assault's motivation and employment is sufficient to sustain an award of benefits, especially when the incident occurs on the employer's premises during work.

AssaultEmployment InjuryCompensabilityFactual QuestionEvidentiary SupportWork-connected DisputePremises LiabilityBuilding SuperintendentBrother DisputeAppellate Review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Wadsworth v. K-Mart Corp.

Claimant, an assistant store manager, sought workers' compensation benefits for psychological injuries after being assaulted while confronting a thief stealing her car from the employer's parking lot. Initially, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge disallowed the claim, but the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, finding the injuries compensable. The employer and its carrier appealed, arguing the assault was personally motivated. The Appellate Division concluded that the statutory presumption of work-related injury was rebutted by substantial evidence of personal animosity, lacking a nexus between the assault and claimant's employment. Consequently, the Board's decision regarding compensability was reversed, and the claim was dismissed.

Workers' CompensationAssaultEmployment NexusPersonal AnimosityPsychological InjuriesStolen VehicleAppellate ReviewStatutory PresumptionArising Out of EmploymentCourse of Employment
References
6
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00711
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 03, 2022

Matter of Timperio v. Bronx-Lebanon Hosp.

Justin Timperio, a medical resident, was shot at Bronx-Lebanon Hospital by a former employee in 2017. He filed a workers' compensation claim, and the Workers' Compensation Board initially found it compensable. However, the Appellate Division reversed this decision on appeal. The court ruled that Timperio's injury did not arise out of and in the course of his employment because the attack lacked a sufficient nexus to his job duties. The assailant was a former employee unknown to Timperio, and the attack was motivated by arbitrary, personal animosity rather than work-related differences. The court also held that the Board was not collaterally estopped from adjudicating the claim despite a prior federal court decision.

Workers' CompensationAssaultCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentCollateral EstoppelPrimary JurisdictionFormer EmployeeGunshot WoundMedical ResidentAppellate Division
References
47
Showing 1-10 of 24 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