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

People v. Wildman

This case addresses the constitutionality of Administrative Code § 10-118 (b) of the City of New York, which prohibits transporting building materials without proof of ownership. Defendant challenged the statute, arguing the complaint was facially insufficient and that the statute violated due process by creating an irrebuttable presumption and being unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. Judge Michael Gerstein denied all of defendant's motions. The court found the complaint facially sufficient and determined that the statute does not create an impermissible irrebuttable presumption. Furthermore, the court concluded that the statute is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, as it provides adequate notice of prohibited conduct and clear standards for enforcement, rationally deterring theft and vandalism.

ConstitutionalityDue ProcessVagueness DoctrineOverbreadth DoctrineIrrebuttable PresumptionAdministrative CodeStatutory InterpretationCriminal LawFacial InsufficiencyProof of Ownership
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Aboaf

This case involves multiple defendants charged with violating Penal Law § 240.35 (4) for being masked in a public place with others similarly disguised during a May Day demonstration in Union Square Park. The defendants, including Daniel S. Chard, Christopher Teret, Darren Kramer, and Dennis Burke, faced additional charges such as resisting arrest, possession of burglar's tools, and possession of a graffiti instrument. They filed a collective omnibus motion to dismiss the information, arguing that Penal Law § 240.35 (4) violates their First Amendment rights to free association and is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The court denied the defendants' claims, finding they did not establish a nexus between compelled disclosure and harassment, and held the statute was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, especially when construed to prohibit masks for no legitimate purpose. Consequently, the court denied both the motions to dismiss the information and to suppress the recovered tangible property.

First AmendmentFreedom of AssociationFreedom of SpeechLoiteringAnti-mask LawVagueness ChallengeOverbreadth ChallengePenal Law § 240.35 (4)Public DemonstrationAnarchists
References
26
Case No. ADJ7423046
Regular
Aug 20, 2012

MITCHELL CONTE vs. LYONS MAGNUS, INC., TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT, AMERICAN ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for removal, which the Appeals Board denied. The lien claimant sought to compel discovery of documents from the defendant employer, but their request was deemed "grossly overbroad." The Board noted the lien claimant could have obtained medical reports directly and is not entitled to other documents as they are not a party. The Board also admonished both parties for boilerplate filings that wasted the Board's time.

Petition for RemovalPetition to QuashFirst Request for Production of DocumentsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantOverbroad DiscoveryWCJWalk-through DocumentDeclaration of ReadinessMedical Reports
References
0
Case No. ADJ4167440 (SBR 0304112)
Regular
Dec 29, 2008

ALEJANDRO SANCHEZ vs. AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order compelling discovery, deeming it interlocutory. However, they granted the defendant's petition for removal, rescinded the discovery order, and returned the case to the trial level. The Board found the original discovery requests for chemicals, MSDS, employee names, and machinery to be vague, overbroad, and improperly sought the compilation of information rather than existing records.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Compelling Requested InformationSubpoena Duces TecumMSDSIndustrial InjuryCumulative ExposureChemicalsSolvents
References
13
Case No. ADJ3283011 (MON 0197163)
Regular
Aug 08, 2008

LINDA BECERRA vs. JACK'S BINDERY, UTICA NATIONAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the underlying order quashing overbroad subpoenas was procedural and not a final determination of rights or liabilities. The Board also denied the petition as a request for removal, finding no irreparable harm and advising the defendant to redraft its subpoenas to specifically target records related to the applicant's industrial injury. The applicant's original injury occurred on September 1, 1993.

WCABFindings and OrderSubpoenas Duces TecumSDTsoverbroadquashedreconsiderationinterlocutory procedural orderssubstantive rightliability
References
7
Case No. SFO 0417742
Regular
Jul 11, 2008

WYNEMA RATTO vs. CENTURY 21 EXCELLENT HOMES, CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE, administered by AARLA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, finding the challenged WCJ order was not a final determination of substantive rights. However, the WCAB granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, agreeing the order to produce the entire claims file was overbroad. The WCAB amended the order to require the claims file be produced at trial, allowing the WCJ to determine specific discovery needs if justified by the lien claimant.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationDismissed PetitionGranted PetitionClaims FileOverbroad OrderGood CauseIrreparable HarmReal Estate Broker's AssociateStipulated Awards
References
10
Case No. ADJ9076336
Regular
Feb 18, 2016

BOBBIETTE BROWN vs. PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal and rescinded an interim discovery order. This order compelled the defendant to produce redacted disciplinary write-ups by four supervisors for the preceding three years. The Board found the request untimely, raised for the first time at a mandatory settlement conference without prior diligent pursuit, and potentially overbroad. Further, the Board was concerned about potential privacy violations and prejudice to unidentifiable disciplined employees.

Petition for RemovalInterim Discovery OrderMandatory Settlement ConferenceDisciplinary Write-upsPrivacy RightsFishing ExpeditionLabor Code section 5502(d)(3)Cumulative Psychiatric InjuryGood Faith Personnel ActionQualified Medical Evaluator
References
3
Case No. VNO 537343
Regular
Jul 07, 2008

KRISTINA POGOSYAN vs. ADMINISTAFF/AIG, Administered By SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because the WCJ's order denying environmental testing was an interlocutory procedural order, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, finding no significant prejudice or irreparable harm, and noting the testing request was overbroad and lacked a showing of necessity. The Board reiterated that reconsideration is only for final orders, and removal is an extraordinary remedy.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDenial of RemovalEnvironmental TestingInvasion of PrivacySpeculativeOverbroadInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiability
References
7
Case No. ADJ8747731
Regular
Jun 07, 2017

MARIA FRAYRE vs. TOMICH BROTHERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the WCJ's order denying the motion to quash, and returned the case for further proceedings. The lien claimant argued the subpoena sought protected trade secrets and was vague and overbroad. The Board found the WCJ failed to address the trade secret claim adequately, necessitating a return to the trial level for proper consideration of the objections. The Board also noted concerns about the subpoena's breadth and lack of clear relevance to the issues.

Petition for RemovalMotion to QuashSubpoena Duces TecumTrade SecretVague and OverbroadLien ClaimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJDiscoveryPrivilege
References
3
Case No. ADJ10739809, ADJ11014321
Regular
Feb 09, 2018

FABIOLA TORRES vs. IRVINE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The WCAB dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of an order compelling the release of records because the order was not a final decision. However, the Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, rescinded the WCJ's order, and returned the matter for further proceedings. This action was taken because the applicant amended her application to withdraw her psyche claim, making the scope of the requested records unclear and potentially overbroad. The WCJ must now clarify the remaining claims and tailor any discovery orders accordingly.

WCABRemovalReconsiderationDiscovery OrderHIPAAPsyche InjuryOverbroadBurdensomePrivacy RightsFinal Order
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 31 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