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. ADJ3110881
Regular
Sep 10, 2019

Fernando Calderon vs. Matharu Assisted Living, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns a lien claimant's failure to timely file a declaration required by Labor Code section 4903.8(d). Although the lien was filed before the statute's effective date, the declaration was submitted over four and a half years late, well after the statutory deadline of January 1, 2014. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to deny the lien, finding the delay constituted unjustifiable delay and laches. The Board also found the lien claimant waived any objection to the issue bifurcation by failing to raise it before reconsideration.

Labor Code section 4903.8Declaration of ReadinessLien ClaimantTimelinessEquitable DoctrineLachesUnjustifiable DelayReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 18, 1988

Brophy v. County of Putnam

The plaintiff, a former Putnam County Deputy Sheriff, sought damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, alleging the county opposed his efforts to obtain workers' compensation benefits and wrongfully terminated his employment. His motion for partial summary judgment, based on General Municipal Law § 207-c, was denied by the Supreme Court due to an unjustified five-year delay in asserting the statutory claim, which would prejudice the county. The Supreme Court's decision to deny the motion was affirmed on appeal, finding no merit in the plaintiff's argument against the "theory-of-pleadings doctrine" and emphasizing the lengthy and unexplained delay in asserting the claim after the law's amendment.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional DistressPartial Summary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation BenefitsDisability PensionEmployment TerminationProcedural DelayStatutory ClaimAppellate ReviewAffirmationGeneral Municipal Law
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 1985

Albanese v. Village of Floral Park

The petitioners, Vito Albanese, Jr. (an infant claimant) and his father Vito Albanese, Sr., appealed from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, concerning their application to serve a late notice of claim against the Village of Floral Park and its Fire and Police Department. The infant suffered severe brain damage after a suicide attempt, and petitioners alleged negligence in rescue efforts. The Supreme Court denied their initial application and a subsequent motion for renewal and reargument, citing the lack of excuse for the delay and prejudice to the respondents. The appellate court affirmed the denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim, finding that while renewal and reargument should have been granted, the original determination to deny the application was correctly adhered to due to the unjustified delay and lack of a demonstrated nexus between the alleged negligence and the injury.

Late Notice of ClaimGeneral Municipal Law § 50-eInfancy DisabilityDiscretionary DenialGovernmental ImmunityNegligence AllegationsBrain DamageRescue EffortsPrejudice to DefendantTimeliness Requirement
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Szwalla v. Time Warner Cable, LLC

The plaintiff, Ms. Szwalla, an account executive, sued her employer, Time Warner Cable, alleging sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII. Her claims stemmed from alleged inappropriate comments and actions by managers Paul Noyd and Cory Karanik, and subsequent reassignments and warnings regarding sales performance. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing they exercised reasonable care to prevent harassment and that Ms. Szwalla unreasonably delayed reporting. The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, finding that they established the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense against the hostile work environment claim due to their prompt response to reported harassment and Ms. Szwalla's unjustified delay in reporting. Additionally, the court found that none of the alleged retaliatory actions, individually or in aggregate, constituted a materially adverse employment action.

sexual harassmenthostile work environmentretaliationTitle VIIsummary judgmentFaragher/Ellerth defenseadverse employment actionworkplace discriminationemployee disciplinesales performance
References
38
Case No. ADJ6973825
Regular
May 21, 2012

MONICA BENARD vs. JENNY CRAIG, SEDGWICK CMS

This case concerns a penalty imposed on Jenny Craig for unreasonably delaying authorization for applicant Monica Benard's chiropractic treatment. The WCJ found a 25% penalty for the delay, which Jenny Craig appealed, arguing the delay was due to the applicant's choice of a chiropractor outside their Medical Provider Network (MPN). The Appeals Board affirmed the unreasonable delay finding but reduced the penalty to 20% of the delayed treatment's value, citing a failure in case management rather than intentional disregard. Jurisdiction was reserved for the parties to adjust the penalty amount.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardMonica BenardJenny CraigSedgwick CMSADJ6973825ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code section 5814Medical Provider Network (MPN)chiropractic treatment
References
9
Case No. ADJ9932467
Regular
Oct 16, 2017

THERESA MCFARLAND vs. REDLANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied an applicant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's decision that "Return-To-Work" supplemental payments under Labor Code section 139.48 are not "compensation" as defined by Labor Code section 3207. Therefore, the applicant was not entitled to a second penalty under Labor Code section 5814 for the employer's delay in providing a Supplemental Job Displacement Benefit voucher, as that delay did not cause a delay in a compensable benefit. The Board found that the applicant's penalty claim for the voucher delay was already resolved and that imposing a second penalty for a non-compensable benefit delay would be unfair and against the principle of balancing justice.

Labor Code section 139.48Return-To-Work supplemental paymentscompensation definitionLabor Code section 3207Labor Code section 5814 penaltyLabor Code section 4658.7 voucherSupplemental Job Displacement Benefitcompromise and release agreementGage v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.unreasonable delay
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Blau Mechanical Corp. v. City of New York

This appeal addresses whether contractual delays, for which the plaintiff-respondent sought monetary damages for plumbing work at the New York Zoological Park, were contemplated by the parties' agreement. The court concluded that these delays were indeed contemplated, reversing a prior Supreme Court finding. The contract included a clause barring damages for delay unless caused by intentional wrongdoing, gross negligence, or willful misconduct. The plaintiff alleged delays due to structural changes, unexpected subsurface conditions, and interference from a local community group. However, the court found that the contract explicitly anticipated changes and differing subsurface conditions. Additionally, delays from community group intrusion were not attributable to the City as grossly negligent or intentional, thereby precluding recovery for damages.

Contractual DelaysDamages for DelayContemplated DelaysConstruction ContractPlumbing WorkNew York CityAppellate ReviewSubsurface ConditionsChange OrdersCommunity Interference
References
4
Case No. SBA 0076630
Regular
Mar 03, 2008

Janice Brackenridge-DeGraff vs. ACTMEDIA, INC., INTERCARE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, overturning a prior decision that denied penalties for delayed payment. The Board found the employer unreasonably delayed payment of the compromise and release agreement by 10 days beyond the agreed-upon 30-day deadline. Consequently, the Board awarded a 5% penalty on the delayed amount and a separate 5% penalty for the unreasonable delay in paying the legally owed interest.

Labor Code section 5814ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleasePenaltyUnreasonable DelayPaymentInterestAttorney's FeesCIGAWCJ
References
1
Case No. ADJ625812 (POM 0280514)
Regular
Aug 24, 2011

William McCarther vs. USS Cal Builders, Zurich North America, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Zurich North America sought removal after applicant's invalid election against SCIF, arguing it was precluded from discovery and entitled to its own medical evidence for a specific injury. The Board granted removal, finding the election void and the discovery delay unjustified. The case involves a specific industrial injury where both SCIF and Zurich may be liable, with Zurich having made its first appearance nearly twenty months after being joined. The Board redesignated the upcoming trial as a status conference to allow Zurich to present policy information and clarify its coverage stance.

Petition for RemovalZurich North AmericaSCIFElection Against SCIFLabor Code section 5500.5(c)Specific InjuryJoinder of Party DefendantCoverage DenialASCIPWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
1
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
Showing 1-10 of 1,331 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