Start Broadly
Select a major doctrine such as compensability, medical treatment, disability, or attorney fees.
SUBSCRIBER INTERFACE PREVIEW
Move through three levels of issue classification.
Select a broad subject in Level 1, narrow it to a legal category in Level 2, and then open the separate SBWC or appellate decision collection for a specific Level 3 issue.
Level 1
000Compensability
SBWC 2,324Appeals 608
100Indemnity
SBWC 2,622Appeals 464
200Medical
SBWC 2,101Appeals 92
300Attorney Fees
SBWC 1,986Appeals 117
400Defenses
SBWC 749Appeals 334
500Procedure
SBWC 538Appeals 441
Level 2
310Assessed Attorney Fees
SBWC 1,876Appeals 95
320Claimant Attorney Fees / Fee Approval
SBWC 123Appeals 25
330Costs and Expenses
SBWC 2Appeals 0
340Appellate Attorney Fees
SBWC 4Appeals 0
Level 3
310.10Assessed fees — entitlement
SBWC 371Appeals 23
310.20Assessed fees — unreasonable defense
SBWC 1,234Appeals 63
310.30Assessed fees — controverted benefits
SBWC 38Appeals 2
310.50Assessed fees — failure to pay benefits
SBWC 82Appeals 5
310.60Assessed fees — failure to authorize medical care
SBWC 22Appeals 0
310.70Assessed fees — amount / reasonableness
SBWC 29Appeals 2
Subtopic: 310.10 — Assessed fees — entitlement — Appellate Decisions (23)
CUMMINGS CONTRACT DELIVERY SERVICES CORP. v. BRITTANY ROCHELLE HEYWARD
Docket No. A22A1391 | Decided: 02-21-2023
DECISION
DOSSIER
Issue: Whether the superior court erred in reversing the Appellate Division’s ruling on attorney fees and litigation expenses.
Rule: A discretionary appeal requires a showing that the lower court committed reversible error warranting appellate review.
Analysis: The Court of Appeals concluded that the application did not satisfy the necessary standard for review and that the superior court lacked a sufficient basis to overturn the Board’s ruling.
Conclusion: The discretionary appeal was dismissed, leaving the lower ruling on attorney fees and litigation expenses undisturbed.
The Law Offices of Jorge Luis Flores, LLC v. Cruz & Associates
Docket No. A17A1983 | Decided: 01-29-2018
DECISION
DOSSIER
Issue: Whether the Board’s attorney-fee award could stand based on the validity of the fee contract and quantum meruit principles.
Rule: Board findings supported by evidence are binding, and an attorney may recover in quantum meruit even if a contract is unenforceable, provided the services were not intrinsically illegal.
Analysis: The appellate court held that the superior court applied the wrong review standard and that the record contained sufficient support for the Board’s fee award.
Conclusion: The superior court was reversed, and the Board’s attorney-fee award was upheld.
Narrow the Issue
Move through categories to the specific legal question presented by the claim.
Compare Authority
Review administrative and appellate decisions addressing the same issue.