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

Cap Makers' Union, Local 2H Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers Union ex rel. Alvarez v. Feinstein

The case involves an action brought by Cap Makers Union, Local 2H, against former officers Michael Feinstein and Luz Rivera, seeking to prevent them from using a similar name for a rival union. Initially filed in New York State court based on state business law and common law, the defendants removed the case to federal court, asserting a federal question under Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act. The federal district court, presided over by Judge Sweet, sua sponte remanded the action back to state court. The court found that federal jurisdiction was lacking because the plaintiff's complaint did not establish a federal cause of action, and federal preemption, raised as a defense, is insufficient for removal. The court also denied Local 2H's request for costs and Rule 11 sanctions against the defendants for improper removal.

Federal jurisdictionRemoval actionRemandState law claimsFederal questionNational Labor Relations ActPreemption defenseTrade name disputeUnion disputeCosts and sanctions
References
5
Case No. ADJ3744023
Regular
May 15, 2009

JOSEPH CRABTREE vs. MITCHELL BERMAN CABINET MAKER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought reconsideration of an award finding an industrial injury to the applicant's abdomen/groin (hernia) and a resulting peripheral nerve injury causing 24% permanent disability. The defendant argued the peripheral nerve injury was not supported and the disability rating was incorrect due to misapplication of the AMA Guides. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report and finding that the medical evidence supported the peripheral nerve injury and the AMA Guides were correctly applied. The Board found the agreed medical evaluator's conclusions were well-reasoned and supported by the evidence.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryHerniaPeripheral Nerve InjuryPermanent DisabilityAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)AMA GuidesPetition for ReconsiderationMedical EvidenceWCJ
References
4
Case No. ADJ9389953
Regular
Mar 08, 2019

IGNACIO BARRON vs. PAK’S CABINETS, SOUTHERN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended its prior decision regarding Ignacio Barron's claim against Pak's Cabinets. The amended decision affirmed the original award of permanent disability at 40%, payable at $230.00 per week for 201 weeks, totaling $46,230.00, less attorney fees. Crucially, the amendment acknowledged that the Employment Development Department paid unemployment benefits during the period of indemnity and allowed a lien for overlapping payments, to be determined by a workers' compensation judge.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportAMENDED decisiontemporary disability indemnitypermanent disability indemnityEmployment Development Departmentunemployment compensation disability benefitsoverlapping paymentslien claimaward
References
0
Case No. ADJ9381883
Regular
Aug 04, 2014

PATRICK ROBERTSON vs. RON BONNANO, dba ALPINE CABINETS, PROCENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, defendant Ron Bonnano, dba Alpine Cabinets, sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Board granted the petition for reconsideration due to statutory time constraints and the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. This action allows for a more complete understanding of the record to ensure a just decision. All future communications must now be filed in writing with the Board's Commissioners in San Francisco, not at the district office or electronically.

References
0
Case No. ADJ3058631 (FRE 0225238) ADJ4053535 (FRE 0206567)
Regular
May 01, 2018

JOE GUTIERREZ vs. CLOVIS SANGER CABINET MANUFACTURING AND AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal filed by defendants Clovis Sanger Cabinet Manufacturing and American Claims Management. The Board found that defendants failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from an interim order vacating a prior deposition order. Furthermore, the Board determined that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The matter is scheduled for a Mandatory Settlement Conference where the deposition issue can be revisited.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDepositionVacated OrderDiscoveryEx Parte
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Maisel v. Sigman

Plaintiffs, Maisel & Co., a manufacturing jobber, initiated an action against the Joint Board of Cloak, Skirt, Dress and Reefer Makers’ Union and the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union. They sought to invalidate a contract signed on July 5, 1923, alleging it was procured under duress and violated anti-monopoly and Penal Laws, besides lacking mutuality. The contract arose from a labor dispute and a strike after Maisel & Co. attempted to reorganize its business, leading to reduced in-house manufacturing and increased reliance on subcontractors. The court, presided over by Burr, J., meticulously reviewed the negotiations leading to the agreement and the subsequent actions of the plaintiffs, concluding that duress was not established. Furthermore, the court analyzed the contract's provisions against claims of illegality, finding that it did not create an illegal monopoly or violate labor laws, asserting workers' rights to combine and negotiate terms. Consequently, the court upheld the validity of the agreement, dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint, and granted judgment in favor of the defendants.

Contract disputeLabor disputeUnion agreementDuress defenseCoercionAnti-monopoly lawPenal law violationRestraint of tradeCollective bargainingStrike action
References
15
Case No. ADJ3894083 (AHM 0133112), ADJ2039503 (AHM 0152076)
Regular
Sep 13, 2010

JOSE GARCIA vs. EPPINK OF CALIFORNIA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a cabinet maker seeking reconsideration of a 39% permanent disability award for a spinal injury. The applicant argues the judge erred by not developing the record on loss of earning capacity and misinterpreting medical reports. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the judge correctly applied the 2005 disability rating schedule based on a doctor's reports consistent with the AMA Guides. The judge properly excluded certain factors from the doctor's opinion when calculating the award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoint Findings and Awardcabinet makerthoracic spinelumbar spinepermanent disabilityloss of earning capacityOgilvie v. City and County of San FranciscoAMA Guides2005 rating schedule
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 10, 1991

Drumm v. Bainton

The plaintiff sustained accidental injuries on November 7, 1986, while working for Party Makers, a catering business operated by defendants John Bainton and Stacy Gerber. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff's injuries occurred during her employment with Party Makers, Inc., a corporation with workers' compensation insurance. The plaintiff cross-moved, claiming Party Makers, Inc. was dissolved and its insurance policy void. The Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion and dismissed the complaint. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that a mere misstatement of the insured's ownership form, which did not affect the risk or employee protection, did not invalidate the workers' compensation coverage, thus barring a common law action.

Summary JudgmentEmployer LiabilityCorporate DissolutionInsurance Coverage DisputeAccidental Injury ClaimProprietorship vs CorporationAppellate ReviewCommon Law Action BarredMisstatement of InsuredWorkers' Compensation Exclusivity
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mister Vee Productions, Inc. v. LeBlanc

This case involves a dispute over copyright infringement and breach of contract. Three corporations—Mister Vee, Delightful, and Vigor—sued individuals known as The Rhythm Makers, Paul Service, and corporations Arista Records, G.Q. Publishing, and Arista Music. Delightful alleged copyright infringement for the song 'Soul On Your Side.' Mister Vee and Vigor claimed The Rhythm Makers breached an exclusive agreement by recording other songs with Arista. The court addressed defendants' motion to dismiss non-copyright claims due to lack of pendent jurisdiction. The court ultimately declined jurisdiction and dismissed the state law claims, finding they did not share a 'common nucleus of operative fact' with the federal copyright claim.

Copyright InfringementBreach of ContractPendent JurisdictionFederal CourtState Law ClaimsMusic Industry DisputeExclusive Recording AgreementMotion to DismissJudicial EconomyCommon Nucleus of Operative Fact
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 16, 2000

Lane v. Fisher Park Lane Co.

Plaintiff, a temporary employee, sued Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) and property managers (Fisher defendants) after being injured by a falling cabinet door. Defendants moved for summary judgment, citing workers' compensation as an exclusive remedy for UBS and lack of landlord liability for Fisher defendants. Plaintiff sought spoliation sanctions due to the cabinet's destruction. The trial court granted sanctions, but the appellate court reversed, asserting that legal entitlement to dismissal should be addressed first, irrespective of the spoliation. The appellate court concluded that plaintiff was a special employee of UBS, making workers' compensation her sole remedy, and that the Fisher defendants, as out-of-possession landlords, were not liable for the non-structural defect. Therefore, summary judgment was granted to all defendants, and the complaint was dismissed.

Spoliation of evidenceSummary judgmentWorkers' compensationSpecial employeeLandlord liabilityPremises liabilityAppellate reviewAffirmative defensesExclusive remedyTemporary employment
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 64 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