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

In re the Claim of Keselman v. New York City Transit Authority

The claimant appealed two decisions by the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning a discrimination claim. In 1986, the claimant sustained a shoulder injury and was placed on disability retirement in 1990 by the self-insured employer. In 2001, the claimant filed a discrimination claim, alleging retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim. Both a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board found the discrimination claim untimely, as it was filed almost 11 years after the alleged discriminatory practice in 1990, exceeding the two-year statutory period under Workers’ Compensation Law § 120. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, rejecting the claimant's argument that the two-year period should start from a later Board decision.

workers' compensationdiscrimination claimtimelinessstatute of limitationsretaliationdisability retirementAppellate DivisionBoard decisionNew York lawjudicial review
References
4
Case No. Appellate Division Docket No. 2022-000000
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 26, 2023

Matter of Howard v. Facilities Maintenance Corporation

Shamira Bell appealed a Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) decision regarding reimbursement for lost wage payments from the Special Disability Fund. The WCB had determined that the employer's application for reimbursement was untimely, filed more than two years after the final decision that the case was subject to Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d). The Appellate Division affirmed the WCB's decision, rejecting Bell's argument that the two-year period for filing a claim under Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d) should commence only after a final administrative award determined the total reimbursement amount. The court clarified that the two-year period begins upon the Board's final determination that the case falls under the specified section of the Workers' Compensation Law. In this instance, the Board's August 2019 decision established this final determination, rendering the employer's July 2022 reimbursement application untimely.

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial Disability FundReimbursement ClaimTimeliness of ApplicationWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate DivisionSection 15 (8) (d)Final DeterminationLost Wage PaymentsStatutory Interpretation
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

L. B. Smith, Inc. v. Circle Air Freight Corp.

Defendant and third-party plaintiff Circle Air Freight Corp. moved to dismiss two affirmative defenses raised by third-party defendant Iberia Air Lines of Spain. The court denied the motion to strike the first affirmative defense, 'failure to state a cause of action,' as it is not subject to such a motion. Regarding the second affirmative defense, which asserted that the action was time-barred by the two-year period in Warsaw Convention article 29, Circle argued this period was inapplicable to contribution claims. However, the court ruled that Warsaw Convention article 29 constitutes an absolute condition precedent to suit, not merely a statute of limitations, and its two-year period applies broadly to all actions for damages, including those for contribution, overriding conflicting State laws. Consequently, Circle's motion to strike Iberia's second affirmative defense was also denied.

Warsaw ConventionContributionStatute of LimitationsCondition PrecedentAir Carrier LiabilityThird-Party ActionAffirmative DefenseDismissal MotionFederal SupremacyTreaty Interpretation
References
9
Case No. LAO 0854791, LAO 0854792
Regular
Sep 12, 2007

JOSE GONZALO VASQUEZ vs. CITY OF PASADENA, legally uninsured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, finding that Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) limits temporary disability indemnity to 104 compensable weeks within a two-year period. The Board determined that since the applicant sustained two injuries to the same body part less than two weeks apart, and temporary disability began after the second injury, the two-year limitation runs concurrently for both, not consecutively. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to double the maximum temporary disability period.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Pasadenalegally uninsuredindustrial injuryright shoulderneckmaintenance public workertemporary disabilityLabor Code section 4656(c)(1)104 compensable weeks
References
1
Case No. ADJ3866110 (MON 0354424)
Regular
Apr 15, 2009

ISABEL VALLADARES vs. HOTEL AND RESTAURANT TEMPS OF CALIFORNIA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the WCJ's finding of temporary total disability for applicant Isabel Valladares from June 30, 2006, to June 30, 2008. The Board found no substantial evidence supported this broad finding of continuous disability for the entire two-year period. Therefore, the prior Findings and Award were rescinded, and the case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a decision based on admitted evidence regarding the applicant's actual periods of temporary disability. The Board also noted potential Labor Code § 4656(c)(1) limitations on indemnity payments within a two-year period from the first payment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationTemporary total disabilityFindings and AwardReport and RecommendationAppeals Board Rule 10848Labor Code § 4656(c)(1)Substantial evidenceEscobedo v. MarshallsBurden of proof
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

MacTaggart v. Gibbs & Cox. Inc.

This appeal concerns the dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute for over five years. The plaintiffs' primary excuse for the delay was their involvement in another litigation concerning similar issues. However, the court found that the issues in the two cases were not identical, and a significant period of a year and a half elapsed after the conclusion of the prior litigation without any further action on the present case. The court also considered the prejudice to the defendant, noting the difficulty and impracticability of recouping extra costs from clients related to contracts completed between February 1944 and December 1945. Consequently, the court affirmed the dismissal of the action.

failure to prosecutedismissal of actionappellate reviewdiscretionary powerprejudice to defendantdelay in litigationstipulationsamended complaintnote of issueextra compensation
References
1
Case No. OAK 0311431
Regular
Nov 30, 2007

JESUS GUERRERO vs. HERTZ HEAVY EQUIPMENT RENTAL, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an award of temporary disability indemnity beyond two years from the initial payment. The Board held that Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) strictly limits temporary disability payments to 104 weeks within a two-year period from the commencement of such payments. Therefore, the applicant's claim for benefits commencing in 2007 was barred, as the two-year window from his 2004 injury had already expired.

Labor Code section 4656(c)(1)temporary disability indemnity104 compensable weekstwo-year periodcommencement of temporary disability paymentPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Awardrescindstipulatedindustrial injury
References
6
Case No. SBR 0331312
Regular
Feb 19, 2008

ROBERT C. DAVIS vs. L-3 COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, overturning the WCJ's award of temporary disability indemnity beyond the statutory two-year limit. The Board held that Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) strictly limits temporary disability payments to 104 weeks within a two-year period from the initial payment date. Although the employer's utilization review practices arguably delayed treatment, the Board found no legal justification for extending payments past the two-year cap.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationTemporary Disability IndemnityLabor Code Section 4656(c)(1)Two-Year Limit104 Compensable WeeksCommencement of PaymentAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Utilization Review (UR)Epidural Injections
References
4
Case No. CV-24-1581
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 05, 2026

Matter of Foster v. Monadnock Constr. Inc.

Claimant, a laborer, was injured in May 2020 when a ladder struck him in the face. The employer and carrier accepted liability for facial injuries. In 2023, claimant's physicians sought authorization for treatment of traumatic brain injury and other conditions, which the carrier declined, arguing the claim was barred by the two-year limitations period under Workers' Compensation Law § 28. The Workers' Compensation Board disagreed, finding that it had received sufficient notice of the claim within two years of the accident due to prompt notification and submission of medical records. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the medical records documenting claimant's symptoms constituted sufficient notice, and the two-year limit does not bar amendment of a timely claim to include consequential injuries.

Workers' CompensationStatute of LimitationsTraumatic Brain InjuryPost-Concussion SyndromeNotice of ClaimMedical RecordsTimely FilingConsequential InjuriesAppellate ReviewBoard Decision
References
8
Case No. ADJ3853793 (SRO 0141299)
Regular
Feb 23, 2015

CHRISTINA LAURA LEPE DUARTE vs. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the end date of temporary disability payments. The Board previously amended an award to extend temporary disability to August 7, 2009. The defendant argued this violated Labor Code section 4656's two-year limitation. However, the Board denied reconsideration, reaffirming that under *Hawkins v. Amberwood Products*, the two-year period begins on the date of the first *payment* of temporary disability, not when it was first owed. Since the first payment was August 8, 2007, the 104-week period validly extended to August 7, 2009.

ADJ3853793FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANYHARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANYLabor Code section 4656temporary disabilitycompensable weeksdate of commencement of temporary disability paymentHawkins v. Amberwood Productsindustrial injuryneck
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 5,020 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