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. 03-cv-4134
Regular Panel Decision

Infantolino v. Joint Industry Board of the Electrical Industry

Anthony Infantolino sued the Joint Industry Board of the Electrical Industry (JIB) and Thomas Bush, alleging unlawful retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and New York State/City laws. JIB moved for summary judgment, arguing procedural defects and substantive failures, including that it was not Infantolino's employer. The court found JIB to be a 'joint labor-management committee' and thus a 'covered entity' under the ADA, refuting the employer argument. The court denied summary judgment regarding the retaliation claims, finding genuine issues of fact as to whether JIB's stated reasons for its actions were pretexts for impermissible retaliation. However, the motion for summary judgment was granted in part, denying punitive and compensatory damages for the ADA retaliation claim and punitive damages for the New York State Human Rights Law claim, but allowing punitive damages for the New York City Human Rights Law claim.

ADA RetaliationDisability DiscriminationSummary JudgmentBurden-Shifting FrameworkCausal ConnectionPretextPunitive DamagesCompensatory DamagesNew York City Human Rights LawNew York State Human Rights Law
References
36
Case No. 01-03-01003-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 10, 2005

Julio Mora v. Hemco Industries, Inc.

Julio Mora, an employee of Hemco Industries, Inc., appealed a judgment rendered in favor of Hemco during a bench trial. Mora filed a negligence action after sustaining a herniated disc injury while lifting equipment at work. The appellate issues included whether Mora presented sufficient evidence of medical causation, whether Hemco judicially admitted causation, and if the trial court erred in denying Mora's motion to re-open for additional evidence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that Mora failed to establish medical causation with expert testimony and did not show due diligence in presenting additional evidence.

NegligenceMedical CausationDirected VerdictBench TrialJudicial AdmissionsMotion to ReopenHerniated DiscEmployer LiabilityAppellate ReviewDue Diligence
References
25
Case No. 03-94-00339-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 16, 1995

Charlie Franks and Industrial Indemnity Insurance Company v. Sematech, Inc., F/D/B/A Semi Conductor Manufacturing Technology Initiative And Burle Industries, Inc.

This case from the Texas Court of Appeals addresses an injured employee's third-party liability claim and an insurance carrier's derivative subrogation rights under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. Charlie Franks was injured, and the workers' compensation carrier, Industrial Indemnity Insurance Company, paid benefits and subsequently filed a subrogation lawsuit. Franks intervened with his own negligence claim, but his intervention was dismissed due to the two-year statute of limitations. Consequently, the trial court granted summary judgment against Industrial Indemnity, ruling its derivative subrogation claim moot as Franks's underlying rights could not be established. The appellate court affirmed both decisions, emphasizing that Industrial Indemnity's initial suit did not assert Franks's full third-party liability cause of action for his joint benefit.

Workers' CompensationSubrogationStatute of LimitationsThird-Party LiabilitySummary JudgmentPlea in InterventionAppellate ReviewTexas LawInsurance Carrier RightsDerivative Claim
References
17
Case No. ADJ7101808
Regular
Feb 21, 2014

DAVID GREGOR vs. CITY OF HAWTHORNE, Permissibly Self-Insured By ADMINSURE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior decision that disallowed the lien. The WCJ found the lien claimant failed to prove treatment was for an industrial injury and that the defendant successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of industrial causation for the applicant's cancer. The Board agreed that the lien claimant did not present substantial evidence of exposure to a known carcinogen, which is required to invoke the presumption. Therefore, the lien claimant failed to meet its burden of proof for industrial causation of the cancer.

Labor Code section 3212.1peace officer presumptionindustrial injurycancer causationrebuttable presumptionknown carcinogenoccupational exposuremedical treatment lienworkers' compensationPetition for Reconsideration
References
9
Case No. ADJ7143993
Regular
Jun 29, 2015

GILBERT ORTIZ vs. CITY OF FULLERTON; Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered By ADMINSURE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior order, finding that res judicata and collateral estoppel did not apply to determine industrial causation for a Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) disability retirement. The stipulated workers' compensation award was expressly limited and the Labor Code section 3212 presumption is inapplicable to PERS matters. Furthermore, the Board found the agreed medical examiner's opinions too speculative and lacking in substantial evidence to establish causation for the disability retirement claim. The case is remanded for further development of the record to determine industrial causation under the correct legal standard without the section 3212 presumption.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGilbert OrtizCity of Fullertonheart injuryindustrial causationres judicatacollateral estoppelstipulated awardAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Gerald Markovitz
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Osborne v. Burlington Industries, Inc.

James Glen Osborne filed a worker's compensation action against Burlington Industries, Inc. for a back injury sustained on July 10, 1980, while working as a "doffer packer." The trial court found the injury to be gradual, with timely notice and the action filed within the statute of limitations, awarding temporary total and permanent partial disability. Burlington Industries appealed, contesting notice, the statute of limitations, and whether the injury arose out of employment. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's findings, concluding that Osborne provided sufficient notice on July 10, 1980, and that the statute of limitations began when he was diagnosed with a ruptured disc in January 1983, making his June 1983 filing timely. The Court also found material evidence, including medical testimony, to support the causation.

Worker's CompensationBack InjuryRuptured DiscGradual InjuryNotice RequirementStatute of LimitationsMedical CausationExpert TestimonyDoffer PackerEmployer Liability
References
6
Case No. ADJ9979717, ADJ9983551
Regular
Apr 15, 2020

James Wieboldt vs. County of San Diego

The Appeals Board rescinded two WCJ findings of industrial colon and vocal cord cancer, returning the cases for further proceedings. The Board found the medical opinions of Drs. Woolf and Berman lacked substantial evidence due to issues with causation, exposure details, and reliance on incorrect legal presumptions. While the applicant has the burden to prove industrial causation absent the cancer presumption, the Board determined the current medical record requires further development. The Board also noted discrepancies regarding the applicant's job titles and claimed periods of exposure that need clarification.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardJames WieboldtCounty of San DiegoColon CancerVocal Cord CancerIndustrial InjuryMedical OpinionSubstantial EvidenceLabor Code Section 3212.1Cancer Presumption
References
8
Case No. 14-08-00795-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 03, 2010

Transcontinental Insurance Company, as Subrogee of the Estate of Reabon Jackson, Jr., Reabon Drusila Jackson (A Minor), Nettie Adams and Donald Robinson v. Briggs Equipment Trust and Genie Industries, Inc.

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals reviewed three summary judgments in a case involving wrongful-death and subrogation claims. Appellants Transcontinental Insurance Company and SelenEr Love sued Briggs Equipment Trust and Genie Industries, Inc. after a fatal industrial accident. The court affirmed the summary judgment against Love's claims due to procedural default. However, it reversed and remanded Transcontinental's claims, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding negligence, product defect, and causation by the defendants, as well as Briggs's liability as a nonmanufacturing seller. The court also clarified that the Texas Family Code's Uniform Parentage Act does not strictly govern paternity determinations in wrongful-death actions, relying on a 'clear and convincing evidence' standard for filial relationships. An unopposed motion to unseal paternity test results was granted.

Product LiabilityWrongful DeathWorkers' CompensationSubrogationSummary JudgmentNegligenceDesign DefectCausationPaternityGenetic Testing
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 09, 1981

Claim of Yarter v. S. R. Beltrone, Inc.

A carpenter died from a cerebral hemorrhage after being found unconscious next to a ladder at work, an incident unwitnessed but occurring shortly after he was seen working on the ladder. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled it an industrial accident and applied the presumption of Section 21 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The employer and its insurance carrier appealed, challenging the application of the presumption and the sufficiency of the medical evidence regarding causation. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the presumption was properly applied given the unwitnessed fall at work, and that the medical testimony supported the finding of causation, thereby upholding the Board's determination that the presumption had not been rebutted.

Cerebral HemorrhageIndustrial AccidentUnwitnessed FallWorkers' Compensation Law Section 21Presumption of CompensabilityMedical CausationAppellate ReviewEmployer LiabilityInsurance Carrier LiabilityWorkers' Compensation Board Decision
References
9
Case No. ADJ10002681
Regular
Sep 07, 2018

ALLISON WIGGINS vs. KERN VALLEY STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the applicant's claim of industrial heart injury, which was initially denied by the administrative law judge despite a finding of industrial hypertension. The Board found that the applicant, a correctional officer, is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of industrial causation for heart trouble under Labor Code § 3212.2. Crucially, the Court determined that the record needs further development to clarify industrial contribution to the applicant's valvular insufficiency, considering the absence of an anti-attribution clause in § 3212.2 which differs from other related statutes. Therefore, the case is returned to the trial level for further development of evidence and a decision on rebuttal of the presumption.

Labor Code section 3212.2heart trouble presumptioncorrectional officerbicuspid aortic valvevalvular diseaseindustrial injurypermanent disabilitycumulative periodrebuttal of presumptionagreed medical evaluator
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 6,240 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