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. 2022 NY Slip Op 00207
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 12, 2022

Shehata v. Koruthu

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed a judgment dismissing a personal injury complaint filed by Adel Shehata against Jose Koruthu. A jury had previously found that Shehata did not sustain a "serious injury" under Insurance Law § 5102 (d) following a motor vehicle accident. Shehata appealed, arguing that a new trial was warranted due to improper references to a workers' compensation claim during trial and summation, and that the Supreme Court erred in denying his motion to strike the defendant's expert testimony. The appellate court concluded that any prejudice from the workers' compensation comments was cured by the Supreme Court's instructions and that the jury's verdict was based on a fair interpretation of the evidence, including conflicting expert testimonies.

Personal injurymotor vehicle accidentserious injuryInsurance Lawjury verdictappellate reviewprocedural errorexpert witnesswaivercurative instructions
References
24
Case No. ADJ1840831 (STK 0210372)
Regular
Feb 03, 2011

DEBORAH JONES vs. MAX MART, INC./SEAN LOLOEE aka SHAHRIAR LOLOEE, ADEL MORADI, THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS as administrator of the UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves a worker injured in 2007 while employed by Max Mart, Inc., which was operating without workers' compensation insurance. The administrative law judge found the employer and its substantial shareholder, Sean Loloee, liable for the injury. Loloee later sought reconsideration, arguing the decision was unjust due to his lack of counsel and inability to pay, and that the lack of insurance was unintentional. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed his petition as untimely, as it was filed over a year after the award. Additionally, the Board noted the petition was also "skeletal" for failing to provide specific legal and factual grounds.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDMAX MART INC.SEAN LOLOEESHAHRIAR LOLOEEADEL MORADIUNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFIT TRUST FUNDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONFINDINGS OF FACT AWARD AND ORDERADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGEINDUSTRIAL INJURY
References
2
Case No. ADJ9531454 MF ADJ9531455
Regular
Dec 03, 2018

MOHAMMAD MORADI vs. NORTHWEST COLORADO TRANSPORT, LLC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the finding of subject matter jurisdiction, determining that the applicant's contract of hire was concluded in North Dakota, not California, as per the written employment agreement signed there. Consequently, the WCAB lacks jurisdiction under Labor Code sections 3600.5(a) and 5305, which require the contract of hire to be made in California for out-of-state injuries. The WCAB's decision was influenced by the appellate court's ruling in *Tripplett*, which emphasized that a written employment contract signed out-of-state supersedes earlier oral agreements for jurisdictional purposes. As a result, the applicant will take nothing on his claims.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubject Matter JurisdictionPersonal JurisdictionContract of HireConditions SubsequentGeneral AppearanceWaiverLabor Code Section 5305Industrial InjuryNorth Dakota
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Scalafani v. Spiegel

This document details a motion for leave to appeal that was presented to the Appellate Division. The motion was ultimately denied. The decision was made without costs. Justices Nolan, Adel, Schmidt, Beldock, and Murphy were present for the decision.

MotionAppealAppellate DivisionLeave to AppealDeniedCourt Decision
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Williams v. Quill

The order denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary injunction was affirmed, without costs. The court provided no opinion for its decision. Judges Hagarty, Carswell, Davis, Johnston, and Adel concurred in the decision. This case references Williams v. Quill, found at 165 Misc. 99, and also a reference on page 737.

Temporary InjunctionMotion DeniedAffirmedAppellate DecisionConcurring Judges
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Micamold Radio Corp. & Local 430, United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, C. I. O.

This case involves an appeal concerning a motion to stay arbitration and to vacate a notice of intention to arbitrate. The order denying the motion was affirmed. The decision was made by a panel of judges including Close, P.J., Carswell, Adel, Lewis, and Aldrich. The affirmation was accompanied by an award of $10 costs and disbursements. No detailed opinion was provided for this decision.

arbitrationappealmotion to stayvacate noticeorder affirmedcosts and disbursements
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tejada v. Littlecity Realty LLC

The plaintiffs allege housing discrimination based on race and national origin against Latino residents in rent-stabilized apartments in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, by defendants Adel and Linda Eskander and their companies. The defendants allegedly targeted Latino tenants, required proof of immigration status, brought frivolous eviction proceedings, and made threats, all in an effort to displace them. After tenants vacated, the apartments were allegedly illegally deregulated, and rents were increased for new, largely non-Latino Caucasian tenants. The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding sufficient allegations of a continuing discriminatory scheme from 2001 to 2017, including rent stabilization fraud, and ruled that the case would proceed to trial with a two-phase plan for injunctive relief and then trial for liability and damages.

Housing DiscriminationRent Stabilization LawNational Origin DiscriminationRace DiscriminationFair Housing ActMotion to DismissContinuing Violation DoctrineSupplemental JurisdictionFraudulent SchemeLandlord Harassment
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Okeke v. New York & Presbyterian Hospital

Plaintiffs Ifeanyichukwu E. Okeke, Jerry Baglione, Iqbal Bajwa, Adel Mahmoud, Naeem U. Qureshi, and Abel De La Trinidad sued The New York and Presbyterian Hospital for age discrimination and hostile work environment under federal, state, and city laws. A jury found the Hospital liable on NYCHRL claims for age-related termination, denial of training, and hostile work environment, but not under federal and state law. The Hospital moved for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, or remittitur. The Court denied the motion for judgment as a matter of law, granted in part and denied in part the motion for a new trial (specifically granting a new trial on the NYCHRL termination claims), and denied the motion for remittitur as moot. The hostile work environment claim under NYCHRL was sustained.

Age DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentNYCHRLADEAMixed-Motive DiscriminationJury VerdictRule 50 MotionRule 59 MotionRemittiturDenial of Training
References
32
Showing 1-8 of 8 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