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. VNO 0438915
Regular
Oct 23, 2008

Applicant vs. University of Southern California

This case concerns an applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of a WCAB decision denying injury claims against the University of Southern California (USC). The applicant alleged a physical altercation with his supervisor, Mr. Pickering, during a meeting on September 20, 2001, which he claims caused various injuries. However, the WCJ found the applicant lacked credibility due to inconsistencies in his testimony and failure to report the incident promptly. The WCJ relied on testimony from witnesses who stated Mr. Pickering merely touched the applicant's shoulders and noted the applicant's history of prior injuries and medical issues not fully disclosed.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiological Safety Specialistspecific injuryanimositycredibility issuesshoulder touchingprior injurieshypertension
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 13, 2003

Cabrera v. Picker International, Inc.

The Supreme Court, Bronx County, affirmed an order dated May 13, 2003, which denied the defendant-appellant's motion for summary judgment. The defendant had sought dismissal of the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff's claim was barred by CPLR 214-c (2) due to the Statute of Limitations and that the defendant owed no duty of care. The court found that the plaintiff's early symptoms were too isolated to trigger the Statute of Limitations before September 1992. Furthermore, the court determined there was sufficient evidence to suggest the defendant may have assumed a duty of care, based on reports of chemical spills and fumes during its equipment servicing, and the plaintiff's continuous complaints regarding the chemical odors.

Summary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsCPLR 214-c (2)Duty of CareChemical ExposureChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseWorkers' Compensation ClaimDetrimental RelianceAssumed DutyToxic Tort
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pickering v. Car Win Construction, Inc.

The Court dismissed an appeal without costs, determining that an appeal as of right from a unanimous Appellate Division order is not permissible unless it directly involves a substantial constitutional question, as per CPLR 5601. Furthermore, a motion for leave to appeal was denied.

Appeal DismissedLeave to Appeal DeniedConstitutional QuestionAppellate DivisionCPLR 5601
References
1
Case No. WCB #G093 3039
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 2023

Matter of Pickering v. Car Win Construction, Inc.

The claimant, a bus operator, sustained a compensable right knee injury. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially found that the claimant's incarceration did not preclude causally related medical treatment. The employer/carrier sought reconsideration, arguing that the claimant lacked attachment to the labor market and that incarceration should not be considered a disability. The Board Panel granted reconsideration and modified the WCLJ's decision. They determined that indemnity payments should be suspended during the period of incarceration because the disability was due to incarceration rather than the work injury, but affirmed that causally related medical treatment remains compensable.

Workers' CompensationRight Knee InjuryIncarcerationIndemnity PaymentsMedical TreatmentCausally Related DisabilityLabor Market AttachmentReconsiderationBoard Panel DecisionSuspension of Benefits
References
0
Case No. FRE 0226474
Regular
Aug 10, 2007

FRANCISCO CAMPOS vs. MOYA FARM LABOR, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an award finding a $2\%$ permanent disability rating for an orange picker injured in 2004. The Board held that the revised rating schedule applied as there was no pre-January 1, 2005 medical report indicating permanent disability, and the parties stipulated to temporary disability payments which negated the notice exception. The Board relied on the published appellate decision in *Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Chavez)*.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardFrancisco CamposMoya Farm LaborState Compensation Insurance FundFindings of Fact and Awardpermanent disabilityrating scheduleLabor Code 4660(d)Baglione IIAMA Guides
References
8
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 01493
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 2023

Transel El. & Elec., Inc. v. First Specialty Ins. Co.

This case involves an appeal concerning an insurance policy's "auto exclusion". Transel, the insured, moved for summary judgment, arguing that their claim fell under an exception for "mobile equipment" after an accident involving unloading a truck's liftgate. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, which denied Transel's motion and granted summary judgment to the insurer. The court ruled that a liftgate is not "mobile equipment" similar to a cherry picker, as it is not used to raise or lower workers, thus the "auto exclusion" applied, negating coverage for Transel.

Insurance policyAuto exclusionMobile equipmentLiftgateSummary judgmentPolicy interpretationCoverage disputeAppellate reviewBodily injuryCommercial package policy
References
2
Case No. 66530
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of the Commissioner of Taxation & Finance v. Fisher

The decedent, a potato picker, became ill at work and sought rest under a bus on the farm. The bus unexpectedly started, running him over and causing his death. The Workers’ Compensation Board reversed an Administrative Law Judge's decision, finding the death causally related under Workers’ Compensation Law section 21, as the decedent was resting due to illness. The employer appealed, contending the decedent had abandoned his employment. The court affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that the determination of whether an activity is within the course of employment is a factual question for the Board, and its finding was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationEmployment InjuryCourse of EmploymentPresumption of CausationAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceFatal AccidentFarm WorkerEmployer LiabilityScope of Employment
References
2
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02604 [204 AD3d 1289]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 21, 2022

Matter of Minichino v. Amazon.Com DEDC LLC

Claimant, Alexandra Minichino, a picker at Amazon.com DEDC LLC, filed for workers' compensation benefits after experiencing numbness in her right arm and shoulder on December 20, 2018, attributing it to an occupational/repetitive stress injury. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) disallowed the claim due to inconsistencies. However, the Workers' Compensation Board modified the decision, ruling that Minichino sustained an accidental and causally-related injury to her cervical spine. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to its factual findings and resolution of conflicting medical testimony.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryOccupational DiseaseCausally-Related InjuryCervical SpineBoard DeterminationSubstantial EvidenceMedical TestimonyCredibilityAppellate Review
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Quinones v. Olmstead Properties, Inc.

Plaintiff, an employee of North Shore Neon Sign, was injured while painting a billboard leased by defendant Fuel Outdoor, LLC. Despite being provided with a cherry picker, harness, and ladders, plaintiff chose to use concrete blocks as a platform, leading to a fall. Plaintiff argued the safety devices were inadequate due to site conditions, but defendant presented evidence that alternative safe means and tie-off locations were available. The appellate court found conflicting evidence, which raised a triable issue of fact as to whether plaintiff's conduct was the sole proximate cause of his injuries. Consequently, the Supreme Court's grant of partial summary judgment to the plaintiff on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim was reversed, and the motion denied.

Construction AccidentLabor LawFall from HeightSafety DevicesProximate CauseSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewWorker InjuryBillboard MaintenancePersonal Injury
References
6
Case No. 533683
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 21, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Alexandra Minichino

Claimant, a picker for Amazon.com DEDC LLC, experienced symptoms including loss of feeling in her right arm and shoulder while working on December 20, 2018. She initially filed a workers' compensation claim for an occupational/repetitive stress injury. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) disallowed the claim due to inconsistencies. However, the Workers' Compensation Board modified this, ruling that she sustained an accidental and causally-related injury to her cervical spine. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's determination regarding both the occurrence of an accidental injury arising out of employment and its causal relationship to the claimant's cervical spine condition, deferring to the Board's resolution of conflicting medical testimony.

Workers' Compensation BoardAppellate DivisionAccidental InjuryCausally Related InjuryCervical Spine InjuryOccupational Disease ClaimRepetitive Stress InjuryIndependent Medical ExaminationWitness CredibilitySubstantial Evidence
References
16
Showing 1-10 of 13 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