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. ADJ9803664
Regular
Dec 04, 2015

JUAN GONZALEZ (Deceased), DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DEATH WITHOUT DEPENDENTS UNIT vs. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL DISABILITY & RETIREMENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal and rescinded a judge's order that stayed proceedings pending the outcome of a probate case. The WCAB determined that probate court findings have limited relevance to determining workers' compensation death benefits and that the WCAB has sole jurisdiction over dependency issues. By staying the proceedings, the judge's order caused significant prejudice to the defendant, SCIF, by hindering discovery and resolution of a potential partial dependency claim. The matter was reset for further proceedings, with parties urged to attempt informal settlement.

Death benefitsDependencyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceProbate proceedingsLabor CodeCalifornia Highway PatrolState Compensation Insurance FundDeath Without Dependents Unit
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coniglio v. Coniglio

This is a proceeding under New York's Uniform Support of Dependents Law (USDL) initiated to seek child support for Jennifer Coniglio from her father, the respondent. A hearing examiner initially recommended a bifurcated support order of $60 per week during the respondent's employment season and $25 per week during unemployment, based on his seasonal construction work. The respondent objected to these findings, challenging the court's jurisdiction due to a pre-existing divorce decree that included child support provisions. Judge Anthony F. Bonadio, referencing Lebedeff v Lebedeff and Nichols v Bardua, ruled that the USDL provides an additional remedy, not a modification, and affirmed the court's jurisdiction to determine support de novo, without being bound by the Supreme Court decree. Considering the approximate equal incomes of both parents, the court set a new support order for the respondent at $30 per week, to be paid through the support collection unit, and ordered him to maintain medical and dental insurance for Jennifer Coniglio as per the separation agreement.

Child Support EnforcementUniform Support of Dependents LawJurisdictional DisputeDe Novo DeterminationParental Financial ContributionSeasonal Employment IncomeUnemployment Benefits ConsiderationMedical Insurance ProvisionDivorce Decree InteractionSupport Collection Unit
References
5
Case No. ADJ1940516 (GOL 0101910)
Regular
Apr 29, 2011

TONY COSTANTINO (Deceased), ELLIE COSTANTINO (Widow), CIERA MILLENDER (Dependent) vs. SANTA BARBARA SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case concerns whether a stepdaughter is entitled to the conclusive presumption of total dependency for workers' compensation death benefits under Labor Code section 3501. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the prior award, holding that the conclusive presumption does not apply to stepchildren absent legal adoption. The Board found insufficient evidence regarding the stepdaughter's actual dependency and returned the matter for further proceedings to develop the record on this issue. The WCAB clarified that while stepchildren can be dependents, the specific statutory presumption of total dependency is limited to "children" under the law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryDeath BenefitsDependencyLabor Code Section 3501Conclusive PresumptionStepchildPartial DependentReconsiderationWCJ
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Insta-Bulk, Inc. v. Powertex Inc.

Powertex, Inc. sought to hold Insta-Bulk, Inc. in contempt for allegedly violating a 1983 injunction by selling patented products outside of agreed-upon territories. Insta-Bulk moved to dismiss the contempt motion, arguing the injunction was inapplicable due to an existing license agreement, or alternatively, to stay proceedings pending arbitration as per the license agreement. The District Court denied Insta-Bulk's motion to dismiss the contempt application, stating that the applicability of the injunction depended on whether Insta-Bulk's actions were authorized by the license. However, the court granted Insta-Bulk's motion to stay the contempt proceedings pending arbitration, concluding that the dispute over sales authorization fell under the license agreement's arbitration clause. The court also clarified that arbitration obligations can survive contract expiration, citing Supreme Court precedent.

ContemptInjunctionPatent InfringementLicense AgreementArbitrationStay of ProceedingsContract DisputeFederal CourtSettlement AgreementJurisdiction
References
2
Case No. ADJ12616197
Regular
Jan 12, 2022

VANESSA FATZER (Deceased) KATRINA S. HAGEN, Director of Department of Industrial Relations, administrator for Death Without Dependents Unit JOEL STAPLETON III vs. KELLY-MOORE PAINT COMPANY INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by ESIS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior finding, and returned the case to the WCJ for further proceedings. The Board found that the original decision, which determined Mr. Stapleton was a partial dependent of the deceased, was not supported by substantial evidence. Specifically, the WCJ's credibility assessment of Mr. Stapleton and his father was insufficient as their testimony was solely from deposition transcripts and they were not called as witnesses at trial. The Board emphasized that deposition testimony alone is insufficient to establish credibility for a dependency determination.

Death Without Dependents UnitPartial DependentLabor Code Section 4706.5Dependency DeterminationCredibility of WitnessesDeposition TestimonySubstantial EvidenceFurther ProceedingsReconsiderationRescission
References
17
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 07122 [165 AD3d 1108]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 24, 2018

Matter of Alexandria F. (George R.)

This case involves consolidated proceedings concerning the alleged abuse and neglect of three children, Alexandria F., Adalila R., and George W.R., by George R. The Family Court, Nassau County, found George R. severely abused Alexandria F. and derivatively abused Adalila R. and George W.R., also finding neglect of all three children. Additionally, the Family Court denied a petition for custody and access filed by Adalila R.-S. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the Family Court's order by deleting the 'severe' designation from the abuse finding regarding Alexandria F., as George R. was not her legal parent at the time. The court affirmed the findings of abuse against Alexandria F. and derivative abuse against Adalila R. and George W.R. Crucially, the Appellate Division disagreed with the Family Court's decision not to treat George R. as the father of Adalila R. and George W.R., citing formal judicial admissions by DSS. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the Family Court for further dispositional proceedings concerning Adalila R. and George W.R., including a re-evaluation of reunification efforts and the appropriateness and duration of protection orders. The denial of Adalila R.-S.'s custody and access petition was affirmed.

Child abuseChild neglectDerivative abuseParental rightsPaternityOrders of protectionCustody and accessFamily Court ActAppellate reviewRemittal
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Crawford

This decision addresses a criminal contempt proceeding initiated by the government against Gerald Crawford and Michael Warren for allegedly violating a temporary restraining order (TRO). The TRO, issued in an underlying civil action, prohibited certain conduct outside reproductive health care facilities. Defendants sought dismissal, arguing the TRO had expired under Rule 65(b) before their alleged violations. The Court rejected this, holding that the extended TRO became an appealable preliminary injunction, thus requiring defendants to obey it. The Court further denied defendants' motions for recusal, change of venue, and dismissal based on First Amendment claims, upholding the enforceability of its order.

Criminal ContemptTemporary Restraining Order (TRO)Preliminary InjunctionRule 65(b)Collateral Bar DoctrineFirst Amendment RightsRecusal MotionChange of Venue MotionJudicial AuthorityAppellate Review
References
55
Case No. Proceedings No. 1, 2, and 3
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2009

Stewart v. Chautauqua County Board of Elections

This case involves three consolidated proceedings under Election Law article 16 concerning a general election for the position of Chautauqua County Legislator for the Seventh District. The court modified a lower court order, invalidating the J.K. affidavit ballot due to the voter's lack of residency and validating two previously unreadable optical scan ballots, concluding voters did not abandon them. It upheld the validity of the John Doe affidavit ballot, citing a lack of jurisdiction for challenges. The court also affirmed the validity of two absentee ballots despite initial application irregularities and the presence of extrinsic materials. A cross-appeal by Leon H. Beightol regarding the opening and validity of absentee ballots was dismissed in part and denied in part.

Election LawAbsentee BallotsOptical Scan BallotsAffidavit BallotsVoter ResidenceBallot ValidityJudicial EstoppelCross AppealChautauqua CountyGeneral Election
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State ex rel. Dunn v. Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children

Maureen M. Dunn filed a writ of habeas corpus to regain custody of "Baby Girl" Dunn, born April 6, 1986, after executing a surrender for adoption to Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children (CHB) on May 1, 1986. The child was placed with prospective adoptive parents, John and Mary Doe, on April 10, 1986. Dunn attempted to revoke her surrender on May 21, 1986, within the 30-day period stipulated by Social Services Law § 384(5). The adoptive parents moved to dismiss or transfer the case, arguing against Supreme Court jurisdiction. The court retained jurisdiction and, following hearings, addressed Dunn's claims of fraud, duress, or coercion in the surrender's execution, which it ultimately denied despite concerns about CHB's procedures and a witness's credibility. The court also clarified the application of Social Services Law §§ 383(6) and 384(5) regarding the natural mother's rights post-surrender, ruling that Dunn lost her presumption of superiority once the child was placed in an adoptive home, requiring the custody determination to be based solely on the child's best interests. Considering the stability, financial security, and family ties of the adoptive parents versus the natural mother's temporary employment, uncertain support from the natural father, and past substance use during pregnancy, the court found it in the child's best interest to remain with the adoptive parents and be adopted by them.

AdoptionChild CustodyHabeas CorpusSurrender of Parental RightsBest Interests of the ChildParental RightsSocial Services LawRevocation of SurrenderFraudDuress
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anderson v. Bernstein

The petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a July 28, 1977, determination by the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, which affirmed a local agency's decision to discontinue her aid to dependent children grant. The Commissioner's decision was based on the petitioner's alleged failure to disclose biweekly support payments from her husband, a finding supported by his signed statement and an agency worksheet. However, neither the husband nor the agency worker testified at the fair hearing. The court found that the evidence presented was insufficient to refute the petitioner's testimony that she had not received support payments from her husband after February 1977. Consequently, the petition was granted, the determination annulled, and the case remitted to the State commissioner for a new hearing.

Public AssistanceAid to Dependent ChildrenFair HearingSufficiency of EvidenceSupport PaymentsDue ProcessAdministrative ReviewRemandSocial Services LawCPLR Article 78
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 7,330 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