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. ADJ11008028
Regular
Feb 15, 2019

LAVERN JAMES vs. GOOD EARTH NATURAL FOODS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Lavern James's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report, with a minor clarification. Specifically, the Board noted that while the applicant experiences difficulty writing and bathing, their physician's testimony and the applicant's own statements did not establish a complete inability to perform these tasks due to their right arm injury. The petition for reconsideration was ultimately denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportdeposition testimonyapplicant's testimonydifficulty writingdifficulty showeringself-caringdeny reconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Rosenblum & Southeastern Clothing Corp.

This case addresses whether Morris A. Scharff, individually, contracted in writing to arbitrate with the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, AFL-CIO. Scharff, as president and sole stockholder of Southeastern Clothing Corp., signed a supplemental collective bargaining agreement. The Union sought arbitration, but Southeastern Clothing Corp. and Scharff moved for a stay of arbitration as to Scharff personally. The court found that Scharff's signature as 'Pres.' was insufficient to bind him individually, emphasizing the need for 'clear and explicit evidence' to superadd personal liability to a disclosed principal-agent relationship. Consequently, the court concluded that Morris Scharff, individually, did not contract in writing to arbitrate.

Arbitration AgreementPersonal LiabilityCorporate OfficerSole StockholderPrincipal-Agent RelationshipCollective BargainingStay of ArbitrationContract InterpretationLabor LawNew York Courts
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gelb v. Board of Elections

Plaintiff Irving A. Gelb (pro se) filed a case ("Gelb II") against the Board of Elections in the City of New York and its individual members and employees, alleging violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights concerning write-in voting procedures in the 1997 elections for Bronx Borough President. This case mirrored an earlier, unsuccessful action ("Gelb I") regarding the 1993 elections. Gelb claimed that the Board failed to provide adequate means or instructions for write-in voting, particularly in primary elections without an "opportunity to ballot" petition. The court denied Gelb's motions for summary judgment and granted the defendants' cross-motion, ruling that the Board's procedures were constitutionally permissible, that no pervasive unfairness was demonstrated, and that sufficient state law remedies were available. Consequently, his state law claims were also dismissed.

Election LawWrite-in VotingSummary JudgmentFederal ClaimsState Law RemediesDue ProcessEqual ProtectionFirst AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentPro Se Litigant
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 1996

Gelb v. Board of Elections in the City of New York

Plaintiff Irving Gelb challenged the New York State Board of Elections, alleging violations of his federal and state rights during the 1993 Bronx County Democratic Party primary and general election. Gelb, a write-in candidate, claimed the Board failed to properly inform voters about write-in options and provide necessary means like ballot space and pencils. The defendants moved for summary judgment, which the court granted, while denying Gelb's motion. The court found that the alleged election irregularities did not amount to pervasive unfairness or intentional discrimination to constitute a federal constitutional violation under due process or equal protection clauses, and adequate state remedies were available. Consequently, the federal claims were dismissed, and the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice.

Election LawWrite-in VotingConstitutional RightsDue ProcessEqual ProtectionSummary JudgmentFederal JurisdictionState Law ClaimsAbstention DoctrineVoting Irregularities
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Estate of Toribio

The case involves an uncontested proceeding for an administrator to resign and for a successor to be appointed. The initial administrator, Jennifer, wishes to resign from her role in the estate of her three-year-old sister, Jannin, who died tragically. She requests the court appoint their father, Domingo Toribio, as the new administrator. The primary legal question addressed by Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen is whether Mr. Toribio, who only speaks, reads, and writes in Spanish, is qualified to serve as a fiduciary under SCPA 707 (2), which allows a court discretion to declare a person unable to read and write English ineligible. The court examines the legislative intent, relevant case law, and societal changes regarding disability and non-English-speaking populations, particularly in New York City. The opinion concludes that English language competence should not be a prerequisite for fiduciary status unless no reasonable accommodations are possible, and grants the application for Jennifer's resignation and Domingo Toribio's appointment, noting he and his counsel have established satisfactory communication.

Estate AdministrationSurrogate's CourtFiduciary AppointmentLanguage BarrierEnglish ProficiencySCPA 707 (2)Multilingual SocietyJudicial DiscretionCivil RightsAccess to Justice
References
12
Case No. ADJ2356422 (VNO 0547491)
Regular
Dec 17, 2009

JENNY JONSSON vs. MARCELO POLANCO, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the matter for further development of the medical record due to insufficient evidence supporting the prior award's findings regarding sleep difficulties and permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryHead/Brain InjuryLeft Lower ExtremitySleep DifficultiesPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical TreatmentMedical Treatment
References
5
Case No. ADJ9047894
Regular
Aug 26, 2014

PEDRO PICENO vs. WEBER LOGISTICS, TRAVELERS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of a prior decision. Reconsideration was granted to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future communications regarding this case must be filed in writing with the Office of the Commissioners of the WCAB, not with any district office or electronically.

Petition for ReconsiderationWeber LogisticsTravelersADJ9047894Pomona District OfficeJune 112014statutory time constraintsfactual and legal issuesjust and reasoned decision
References
0
Case No. ADJ7219667
Regular
Feb 13, 2015

MARK JOHNSON vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, DEPARTMENT OF AIRPORTS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant Mark Johnson's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB requires further study of the factual and legal issues to issue a just decision. All future filings must be submitted in writing to the WCAB Commissioners' office, not district offices or e-filed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionOffice of the CommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management SystemLevy Ford WallachLos Angeles City Attorney
References
0
Case No. ADJ1777780 (MON 0291909) ADJ4001050 (MON 0332982)
Regular
Dec 29, 2014

ALICIA CRUZ vs. CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER, SEDGWICK CMS

Both the applicant and defendants sought reconsideration of a prior WCAB decision. The Board granted reconsideration to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues presented. This action is necessary to ensure a complete understanding of the record and facilitate a just and reasoned decision. All future communications must be filed in writing with the Office of the Commissioners of the WCAB.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetitions for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationElectronic Adjudication Management Systemstatutory time constraintsfactual and legal issuesjust and reasoned decisionOffice of the Commissionersstreet addressPost Office Box address
References
0
Case No. ADJ7661799
Regular
Nov 20, 2012

ELIU OBESO GARCIA vs. THE KROGER COMPANY dba FOOD 4 LESS OF CALIFORNIA, INC., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SE

This case before the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board involves Eliu Obeso and defendant The Kroger Company. The Board issued an Opinion and Order Granting Reconsideration. Pending a decision after reconsideration, all future filings and communications are to be submitted in writing directly to the Office of the Commissioners in San Francisco, not to any district office or via e-filing.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDReconsiderationELIU OBESOTHE KROGER COMPANYFOOD 4 LESSPermissibly Self-InsuredSEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESADJ7661799Riverside District OfficeOPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 278 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