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

Fox News Network, L.L.C. v. Time Warner Inc.

This case arises from a dispute between Time Warner and Fox concerning Time Warner's decision not to carry Fox News on its New York City cable channels. Fox initially sued Time Warner, prompting Time Warner to file counterclaims alleging that Fox conspired with New York City officials to unlawfully coerce Time Warner into carrying Fox News. Time Warner's counterclaims assert violations of its First Amendment and Due Process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and tortious interference with contractual relations. Fox moved to dismiss these counterclaims, arguing that its actions were protected by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which generally shields lobbying activities. The court denied Fox's motion, concluding that Time Warner had adequately alleged a conspiracy and that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine might not apply if Fox's conduct was found to be illegal or corrupt, thus allowing the counterclaims to proceed.

First Amendment RightsDue ProcessSection 1983Noerr-Pennington DoctrineCable ActAntitrustLobbyingFreedom of SpeechConspiracyMotion to Dismiss
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York Times Co. v. Newspaper & Mail Deliverers' Union of New York & Vicinity

The New York Times Company initiated a contempt action against the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers’ Union of New York and Vicinity (NMDU) and three union officials (Douglas LaChance, Lawrence May, Monte Rosenberg). The action stemmed from the defendants' alleged violation of a June 4, 1980 consent order, which mandated compliance with "status quo" rulings by an Impartial Chairman in collective bargaining disputes. On September 17, 1980, NMDU members engaged in a work stoppage following an employee's suspension, despite an Impartial Chairman's ruling that the suspension did not alter the status quo and ordering a return to work. The court found NMDU and Lawrence May guilty of contempt, ordering them to pay $229,718 in compensatory damages to the Times. However, the court denied the application for contempt against Douglas LaChance and Monte Rosenberg, and also denied the Times' request for a prospective fine.

Labor DisputeContempt of CourtNo-Strike ClauseArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementWork StoppageDamagesUnion LiabilityWildcat StrikeStatus Quo Ruling
References
11
Case No. ADJ1459132
Regular
Jun 21, 2011

MARK JONES vs. TIME, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Mark Jones's petition for reconsideration in his case against Time, Inc. The Board adopted and incorporated the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report, which provided the reasons for the denial. The order formally denies the petition for reconsideration. The decision was dated and filed on June 21, 2011, and served on the applicant and his attorneys.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDenying ReconsiderationPermissibly Self-InsuredLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyWCJ ReportPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeMON District OfficeADJ1459132MON 0294660
References
0
Case No. ADJ7284840
Regular
Jan 29, 2016

Sean Nguyen vs. Los Angeles Times, ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Sean Nguyen's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found that Nguyen sustained only a back laceration in a 1989 injury, with treatment not necessary after December 8, 1989. The judge found the applicant's subsequent claims of extensive injuries, including neck and back pain, were not supported by credible medical evidence from the time of the incident. The petition was also denied for failing to specify the statutory basis or detail the grounds for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportLabor Code Section 5903Labor Code Section 5902Order Denying PetitionSEAN NGUYENLOS ANGELES TIMESESISADJ7284840
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Alleyne v. Time Moving & Storage Inc.

Plaintiffs Marcel Alleyne and Earl Legrande filed a class action lawsuit against Time Moving & Storage, Inc. and The Time Record Storage Company, LLC, alleging failure to pay overtime wages in violation of federal FLSA and New York Labor Law. Defendants invoked the motor carrier exemption as a defense. The parties reached a class settlement agreement for the state law claims, which was provisionally certified. Following objections from some class members regarding the fairness of the settlement, class certification, and attorney's fees, the Court, presided over by Judge Vitaliano, granted final class certification and approved the settlement. The Court found the settlement fair and reasonable given the risks of litigation, denied the objectors' motion to intervene, and approved attorney's fees of $60,000.

Class ActionOvertime WagesFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawMotor Carrier ExemptionWage and Hour ClaimsClass SettlementSettlement ApprovalAttorney's FeesRule 23 Certification
References
41
Case No. unavailable
Regular
Jul 12, 2007

MORA vs. SOUTH BAY UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT, KEMPER INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a lien claim by Beach Cities Surgery Center for medical treatment provided to an applicant injured in an admitted industrial incident. The WCJ initially disallowed the lien because the Surgery Center failed to prove its licensure/accreditation at the time of treatment. Although the petition for reconsideration appeared untimely, the Board accepted it as timely based on affidavits indicating hand delivery. Ultimately, reconsideration was denied on the merits, upholding the WCJ's original disallowance of the lien claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial injuryLicensed or accreditedMedical treatmentLien claim disallowedPetition for reconsiderationUntimely filing
References
0
Case No. ADJ15763825
Regular
Sep 16, 2025

CLAUDIO CARDOZO vs. ROCK AND ROLL CAR WASH, REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Redwood Fire and Casualty Insurance Company dba Berkshire Hathaway Homestate Companies. The petition challenged a lien trial decision concerning a medical-legal evaluation performed by Dr. Michaels of Premier Psychological Services. The WCJ found that a medical dispute regarding psyche existed at the time of the evaluation, Dr. Michaels was validly designated as the Primary Treating Physician, and the evaluation was not barred by the 60-day rule for new claims as it was an amendment to an already accepted claim. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and denied the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5909Adjudication NumberOpinion and Order Denying PetitionWCJ ReportEAMS TransmissionNotice of TransmissionProof of ServiceFindings and Order
References
4
Case No. 01 CR 1121
Regular Panel Decision

Albanese v. United States

Elio Albanese, who pled guilty to conspiracy to commit robbery, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to correct his sentence, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. He claimed his attorney advised him to accept a plea agreement with a stipulated loss amount and failed to file a timely appeal regarding his Criminal History Category. The Court, presided over by Judge McMahon, denied the motion. The decision found that Albanese knowingly and voluntarily accepted the plea, and his claims of ineffective assistance regarding the loss amount were not supported by evidence or prejudice. Furthermore, his attorney affirmed that Albanese never instructed her to file an appeal.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel28 U.S.C. § 2255Plea AgreementSentencing GuidelinesCriminal History CategoryHobbs Act RobberyConspiracySecond Circuit RemandFederal Rules of Criminal ProcedureStipulated Loss Amount
References
39
Case No. 2024 NYSlipOp 01444 [225 AD3d 1189]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 15, 2024

Jesmain v. Time Cap Dev. Corp.

Plaintiff Connor B. Jesmain was injured at a construction site on property owned by 980 James Street, LLC, while moving a stack of drywall panels that fell on his ankle. He commenced a Labor Law and common-law negligence action against Time Cap Development Corp. and 980 James Street, LLC (980 James defendants), and Interior Builders Framing and Drywall LLC. The 980 James defendants also sought contractual indemnification against third-party defendant Syracuse Energy Systems, Inc. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, reinstating Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) causes of action due to issues of fact regarding safe storage and a dangerous material pile. The court also granted summary judgment dismissing Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims against 980 James, denied contractual indemnification for 980 James defendants against Syracuse Energy, and granted summary judgment dismissing 980 James defendants' cross-claim for contractual indemnification against Interior Builders. The decision affirmed the denial of Interior Builders' motion to dismiss the amended complaint and other cross-claims.

Construction Site InjuryDrywall AccidentLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Labor Law § 200Common-Law NegligenceSummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationThird-Party ActionAppellate Review
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York Times Co. v. City of New York Fire Department

Petitioners, the New York Times Company and Jim Dwyer, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action seeking the disclosure of records from the Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY) under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), related to the events of September 11, 2001. Their request included oral histories of FDNY personnel and radio communications. The FDNY denied parts of the request, citing exemptions for law enforcement purposes, intra-agency materials, and personal privacy. The court ruled that the FDNY failed to demonstrate the applicability of the law enforcement exemption. Consequently, the court ordered the disclosure of factual portions of the oral histories, the 911 tapes and transcripts of family members who waived privacy, and non-intra-agency parts of operator, dispatcher, and unit communications, while denying petitioners' request for attorneys' fees.

Freedom of Information LawFOILPublic RecordsSeptember 11World Trade CenterFDNYOral HistoriesRadio CommunicationsPrivacy ExemptionLaw Enforcement Exemption
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 19,779 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