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

Goldberg v. Touche Ross & Co.

In this consolidated class action, Touche Ross & Co., as assignee of claims from the Goldberg action, moved for summary judgment against Theodor H. Kaufman, Benjamin Lieberman, and Jack Shapiro. The litigation originated from allegedly fraudulent financial statements issued by Giant Stores Corp. for fiscal years 1971 and 1972, which Touche Ross had certified as Giant's auditor. Shapiro, an officer and director of Giant, was previously convicted of fraud related to these statements. The court addressed Shapiro's arguments against Touche Ross's motion, including claims of impermissible indemnity and factual disputes regarding causation and damages. The court emphasized a strong public policy against indemnity in securities fraud cases and denied Touche Ross's motion, suggesting that contribution from nonsettling defendants might be an alternative remedy.

Securities FraudClass ActionSummary Judgment MotionIndemnityContributionCorporate OfficersFinancial Statements FraudAuditor LiabilityBankruptcy ActSEC Investigation
References
20
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00289
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2022

Matter of Personal-Touch Home Care of N.Y., Inc. v. City of N.Y. Human Resources Admin.

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, which denied a petition to overturn a decision by the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Contract Dispute Resolution Board (CDRB). The CDRB had found that Personal-Touch Home Care's claim to use unspent Medicaid funds for fiscal year 2007 to offset workers' compensation assessment expenses from 2009-2010 was foreclosed. The court agreed that the State Department of Health (DOH) rationally interpreted its regulations, concluding that these retroactive assessments, levied due to financial mismanagement of a self-insurance trust, were not

Workers' CompensationMedicaid FundsSelf-Insurance TrustFiscal YearRetroactive AssessmentAdministrative LawAgency DeferenceContract DisputeHealth Care AgenciesFinancial Mismanagement
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Resnick v. Touche Ross & Co.

This action addresses claims made by purchasers of Weis Securities, Inc. stock against Touche Ross, Weis' auditor, following the firm's collapse in 1973. Plaintiffs allege Touche Ross certified materially false and misleading financial statements in 1972, leading to violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities Act of 1933, common law negligence, and aiding and abetting. The court examined the scienter standard for 10b-5 claims, concluding that recklessness suffices, and thus allowed the 10b-5 and aiding and abetting claims to proceed. However, claims under Sections 17(a) and 18(a) of the 1934 Act were dismissed, the former due to plaintiffs not being customers and the latter due to time limitations. The court also maintained pendent jurisdiction over the gross negligence claim, citing New York law that allows actions against accountants for recklessness even without strict privity.

Securities FraudAuditor LiabilityRecklessness StandardRule 10b-5Aiding and Abetting LiabilityCommon Law NegligencePendent JurisdictionSecurities Exchange Act of 1934Securities Act of 1933Financial Misstatements
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Boles v. Dormer Giant, Inc.

This case addresses whether Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 shields an employer from third-party liability for contribution or indemnity when the employer failed to secure workers' compensation for an injured employee. Plaintiff Douglas Boles was injured in a scaffolding collapse while working for Personal Touch Home Improvements, Inc., a subcontractor of Dormer Giant, Inc. Boles sued Dormer Giant, which then brought a third-party action against Personal Touch. The lower courts dismissed Dormer Giant's third-party complaint, concluding Personal Touch was protected by Section 11. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that an employer must comply with Workers’ Compensation Law § 10 by securing compensation for employees to benefit from the protections of Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 against third-party liability, reinforcing the legislative intent behind the 1996 Omnibus Workers’ Compensation Reform Act.

Workers’ Compensation Law § 11Employer LiabilityThird-Party ContributionThird-Party IndemnityGrave InjuryFailure to Secure Workers' CompensationLabor Law § 240(1)Scaffolding AccidentSubcontractor LiabilityStatutory Interpretation
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

World Touch Gaming, Inc. v. Massena Management, LLC

Plaintiff World Touch Gaming, Inc. sued Massena Management, LLC, Akwes-asne Mohawk Casino, and St. Regis Mohawk Tribe for breach of contract related to lease and sales agreements for gaming machines. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint citing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to the Tribe's sovereign immunity. The court found that the Tribe and its enterprise, the Casino, enjoy sovereign immunity, which was not effectively waived by the Management Company's Senior Vice President. Despite explicit waiver language in the agreements, the Tribe's constitution and civil judicial code dictate that only the Tribal Council can expressly waive sovereign immunity, which it did not do. Consequently, the court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss against the Tribe and the Casino. Furthermore, the Management Company was also dismissed from the suit as the Tribe and the Casino were deemed indispensable parties under Fed.R.Civ.P. 19(b).

Contract DisputeSovereign ImmunityTribal LawIndian Gaming Regulation ActBreach of ContractMotion to DismissSubject Matter JurisdictionAgency LawWaiver of ImmunityIndispensable Parties
References
13
Case No. ADJ1498961
Regular
Sep 23, 2010

DALE ARNOLD vs. RALPH'S AKA KROGER

This case involves an applicant's claim for workers' compensation benefits for a right shoulder injury. While the initial award recognized industrial injury to the applicant's left shoulder, right elbow, and right forearm, the defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the right shoulder injury was not work-related. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof for the right shoulder injury. They disagreed with the primary treating physician's opinion and found the agreed medical evaluator's opinion more persuasive, ultimately reversing the finding for the right shoulder.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardCumulative TraumaIndustrial InjuryLeft ShoulderRight ElbowRight ForearmRight ShoulderPrimary Treating Physician
References
0
Case No. SFO 0425862 SFO 0425863
Regular
May 14, 2008

William Bishop vs. IGC POLYCOLD SYSTEMS, ROYAL & SUN ALLIANCE

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant claiming injury to his right shoulder and seeking a new vocational rehabilitation plan. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of a new vocational plan and the finding of no industrial injury to the right shoulder. However, they reversed the WCJ to award benefits resulting from right shoulder surgery, deeming it a consequence of the compensable left shoulder injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationVocational Rehabilitation PlanIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderLeft ShoulderTemporary DisabilityQualified Medical EvaluationCausationNon-Industrial
References
8
Case No. VNO 0438915
Regular
Oct 23, 2008

Applicant vs. University of Southern California

This case concerns an applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of a WCAB decision denying injury claims against the University of Southern California (USC). The applicant alleged a physical altercation with his supervisor, Mr. Pickering, during a meeting on September 20, 2001, which he claims caused various injuries. However, the WCJ found the applicant lacked credibility due to inconsistencies in his testimony and failure to report the incident promptly. The WCJ relied on testimony from witnesses who stated Mr. Pickering merely touched the applicant's shoulders and noted the applicant's history of prior injuries and medical issues not fully disclosed.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiological Safety Specialistspecific injuryanimositycredibility issuesshoulder touchingprior injurieshypertension
References
0
Case No. ADJ3849140 (RDG 0119253)
Regular
Apr 04, 2011

THEMAS TRESLER vs. MOUNTAIN SATELLITE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a dispute over workers' compensation jurisdiction regarding a left shoulder injury. The defendant, SCIF, sought reconsideration of a WCJ's award of treatment for the shoulder, arguing lack of jurisdiction. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and returned the matter for further proceedings. This decision acknowledges that the left shoulder claim may not have been definitively resolved by prior stipulations and requires the WCJ to determine if Labor Code section 5815 applies, potentially leading to a full hearing on the shoulder injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryLow Back InjuryLeft Shoulder InjuryStipulation with Request for AwardDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedContinuing JurisdictionLabor Code Section 5909
References
5
Case No. ADJ8361032
Regular
Sep 04, 2019

CAROL WORKMAN vs. ST. THERESA/ST. JOSEPH SCHOOL

This case concerns Carol Workman's claim for benefits from the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) due to bilateral shoulder injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) overturned a prior decision and found Workman entitled to SIBTF benefits. This was based on evidence showing her current work-related shoulder injuries, when combined with prior non-industrial and industrial shoulder issues, met the statutory threshold for SIBTF eligibility. The Board found that the cumulative injury to her shoulders resulted in at least 5% permanent disability before adjustments, satisfying the requirement for SIBTF benefits.

SIBTFSubsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fundwhole person impairmentcumulative traumaacromegalybilateral shouldersrange of motionmotor deficitapportionmentdiminished future earning capacity
References
17
Showing 1-10 of 809 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