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

United Derrickmen & Riggers Assoc. Local Union No. 197 of the International Ass'n of Bridge v. Local No. 1 Bricklayers & Allied Craftsman

This action was initiated by Local 197 against Local 1, alleging breach of contract based on violations of the Constitutions of the Building and Construction Trades Department (BCTD) and the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York (BCTC), as well as their respective jurisdictional dispute resolution plans. Local 197 sought partial summary judgment to compel Local 1 to honor its contractual obligations and to rejoin the BCTC, from which Local 1 had withdrawn. Conversely, Local 1 sought summary judgment to dismiss the entire suit, arguing that Local 197 lacked standing as a third-party beneficiary and that the state law tort claims were preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The court determined that Local 197 was an incidental, not intended, beneficiary of the BCTD Constitution and National Plan, and that Local 1's disaffiliation from the BCTC removed its obligations to the New York Plan. Additionally, the court ruled that Local 197's state law claims for tortious interference were preempted by the NLRA. Consequently, the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was denied, and the defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment was granted, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit.

Labor LawJurisdictional DisputeBreach of ContractSummary JudgmentThird-Party BeneficiaryNLRA PreemptionUnion AffiliationCollective BargainingAFL-CIO ConstitutionLocal Union Rights
References
26
Case No. LAO 0842819
Regular
Sep 04, 2007

JUAN M. VILLALOBOS vs. ANCRA INTERNATIONAL, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case concerns the application of the correct permanent disability rating schedule for an industrial injury occurring before January 1, 2005. The applicant sought to apply the prior rating schedule, arguing specific medical reports indicated permanent disability. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the use of the revised rating schedule. The Board found no qualifying pre-January 1, 2005 medical report indicating the applicant was permanent and stationary, nor was the employer required to issue notice under Labor Code § 4061 until after that date.

WCABReconsiderationSupplemental Findings and AwardIndustrial InjuryLower BackPermanent DisabilityRevised Rating SchedulePrior Rating ScheduleLabor Code Section 4061Labor Code Section 4660(d)
References
4
Case No. ADJ8130064
Regular
Mar 29, 2019

Victor Juarez vs. Masonry by Joe, State Compensation Insurance Fund, Imperium Insurance Company, Athens Administrators, Endurance Southern Insurance

This case involves lien claimants who filed their liens in 2012 but failed to submit timely Labor Code section 4903.8(d) declarations, which were required for liens filed before January 1, 2013, by January 1, 2014. The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's order dismissing the liens, and returned the matter for further proceedings. The Board found that while the declarations were untimely, the specific remedy for such untimeliness for pre-2013 liens is not defined in the statute. However, the Board noted that the WCAB possesses equitable powers, including the application of the doctrine of laches, to address unjustifiable delay in lien claims.

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)Lien claimantsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Orderuntimely declarationsLabor Code section 4903.8(e)Senate Bill 863equitable doctrine of lachesunjustifiable delayequitable powers
References
12
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 01255 [158 AD3d 565]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 2018

Pena v. Jane H. Goldman Residuary Trust No. 1

Juan Pena, an injured worker, sued Jane H. Goldman Residuary Trust Number 1 and Sol Goldman Investments, LLC (SGI) under Labor Law § 240 (1) after sustaining injuries from a fall off an unsecured and wobbling ladder. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted Pena partial summary judgment on the issue of liability against SGI. SGI appealed this decision. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding that Pena's deposition testimony sufficiently established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The court concluded that SGI failed to raise a triable issue of fact, particularly regarding the provision of adequate safety devices or whether Pena was the sole proximate cause of the accident.

Summary judgmentLabor Law § 240(1)Ladder accidentUnsecured ladderFall from heightConstruction site accidentAppellate decisionPrima facie caseTriable issue of factProximate cause
References
4
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 01287 [214 AD3d 785]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 15, 2023

Mora v. 1-10 Bush Term. Owner, L.P.

John Mora, an injured plaintiff, along with his wife, sued 1-10 Bush Terminal Owner, L.P. after he fell from a ladder during demolition work, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court, Kings County, granted the plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The defendant appealed this decision, challenging the grant of summary judgment. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, finding that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case and the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentDemolition WorkSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewLabor Law § 240 (1)Proximate CauseNondelegable DutyElevated Work SitesSafety Devices
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2004

Thomas v. Fall Creek Contractors, Inc.

The plaintiff appealed an order denying his motion for partial summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) claims. The appellate court modified the order, dismissing both claims. The court found that the temporary wooden stairs, from which the plaintiff fell, were under construction and the plaintiff was aware they were not bolted. Another set of completed stairs was available. The stairs did not break and were not defective, implying the plaintiff's actions were the sole cause of injury. Regarding the Labor Law § 241(6) claim, which relied on 12 NYCRR 23-1.21(b)(4)(i) concerning portable ladders, the plaintiff conceded the specific 36-inch extension requirement was not applicable. Since no other regulation was cited, this claim was also dismissed.

Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Summary JudgmentConstruction AccidentTemporary StairsSole Cause of InjuryLadder RegulationAppellate ReviewNew York CourtCPLR 3212(b)
References
3
Case No. ADJ3141261 (LAO 0814644) ADJ3582498 (LAO 0815914)
Regular
Feb 09, 2009

MARIA DEL CARMEN CEJA vs. INTESYS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., BROADSPIRE

This case concerns a workers' compensation lien for chiropractic treatment. The administrative law judge previously ruled that only 24 visits were compensable under Labor Code Section 4604.5(d)(1). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding this interpretation erroneous. The Board rescinded the prior finding and returned the matter for further proceedings, clarifying that the 24-visit limit applies only to injuries occurring on or after January 1, 2004, which these pre-2004 injuries do not.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantReconsiderationLabor Code Section 4604.5Chiropractic visitsCompromise & ReleaseDate of injuryMedical treatment utilization schedulePresumptively correctRebuttable presumption
References
1
Case No. ADJ1457992 (AHM 0084718)
Regular
Dec 26, 2014

DARLENE HELLER vs. COWELL BAKER'S STRIPPING SERVICES, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS, FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a dispute over the correct procedure for obtaining medical reevaluations for a worker's injury with a date prior to January 1, 2005. The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, reversing an earlier decision that had directed the parties to use the panel QME process. The Board clarified that for pre-2005 injuries, the pre-Senate Bill 899 AME/QME procedures apply, not the current section 4062.2 QME process. One Commissioner dissented, arguing the prior award should be reinstated.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and Order DenyingFindings and AwardLabor Code section 4062.2panel qualified medical examinationQMEdisputed body partsadmitted liabilitydate of injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ3834810 (SRO 0121550)
Regular
Sep 03, 2009

MICHAEL RISCH vs. AT HOME NURSING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding of 100% permanent disability for the applicant. The Board found substantial evidence supported the total permanent disability rating and the applicant's average weekly earnings. The 1997 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule was correctly applied due to pre-January 1, 2005 medical reporting indicating permanent disability. The Board also affirmed the WCJ's rejection of apportionment to pre-existing conditions, as the applicant had fully recovered and returned to strenuous work.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMichael RischAt Home NursingState Compensation Insurance FundADJ3834810Opinion and Order Denying Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardadministrative law judgecumulative traumaindustrial injury
References
17
Case No. ADJ8015232
Regular
Oct 17, 2017

ROSA RAMIREZ vs. RANCHO HARVEST, INC., STAR INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to determine the validity of a lien for interpreting services. The Board affirmed the lien claimant's entitlement to $1,905.00 for services rendered prior to January 1, 2013. However, they rescinded the original decision regarding services after January 1, 2013, finding them not subject to Independent Bill Review. The case is returned to the trial level to determine the reasonable value of services provided after that date.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantInterpreting ServicesOfficial Medical Fee Schedule (OMFS)Independent Bill Review (IBR)Senate Bill 863 (SB 863)Labor CodeStatute of LimitationsExplanation of ReviewAdministrative Director
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 5,430 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