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. 2021 NY Slip Op 07297
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2021

Teodoro v. C.W. Brown, Inc.

The plaintiff, Silvino Teodoro, an employee of Westchester County Electric, Inc., suffered an electric shock in August 2013 while replacing a light ballast. He brought an action against C.W. Brown, Inc., Westpark I, LLC, Nine West Group, Inc., and PepsiCo, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6). The Supreme Court, Westchester County, granted summary judgment to all defendants and denied the plaintiff's motions. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the lower court's decisions, ruling that the plaintiff's work constituted routine maintenance, which is not covered by Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6). Furthermore, the court found that the defendants did not exercise supervision or control over the plaintiff's work, thus precluding liability under Labor Law § 200.

Labor LawSummary JudgmentRoutine MaintenanceSpoliation of EvidencePersonal InjuryAppellate ReviewWorkplace SafetyElectric ShockGeneral ContractorSubcontractor Liability
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 14, 2015

Boice v. M+W U.S., Inc.

This case concerns a wage-and-hour action filed by Vincent E. Boice against M+W U.S., Inc., Total Facility Solutions, Inc., and M+W Zander N.Y. Architects, P.C. under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff moved to conditionally certify a collective action and compel discovery. Magistrate Judge Hummel recommended denying conditional certification without prejudice but granting limited pre-certification discovery for employee contact information. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby accepted and adopted this Report-Recommendation, denying the defendants' motion to strike the declaration and the plaintiff's motion for conditional certification while granting in part the motion to compel discovery. The court also denied other relief sought by the plaintiff and reopened the discovery period for 90 days.

FLSAWage-and-Hour ActionCollective ActionConditional CertificationDiscovery MotionOvertime CompensationJudicial ReviewEmployment LawClass Action ProcedureMagistrate Judge Recommendation
References
60
Case No. 26 NY3d 107 (2016)
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2016

S.B. v. A.C.C.

This case addresses the definition of "parent" under Domestic Relations Law § 70 (a) for purposes of custody and visitation for unmarried couples. The New York Court of Appeals overrules its 1991 decision in Matter of Alison D. v Virginia M., which had limited parental standing to biological or adoptive parents. The Court now holds that a non-biological, non-adoptive partner has standing if they can show by clear and convincing evidence that the parties agreed to conceive and raise a child together. In Matter of Brooke S.B. v Elizabeth A.C.C., the Appellate Division's order is reversed and the matter remitted for further proceedings under this new standard. In Matter of Estrellita A. v Jennifer L.D., the Appellate Division's order is affirmed, upholding standing based on judicial estoppel. This decision aims to address the unworkability of the Alison D. rule in light of evolving familial relationships, particularly for same-sex couples, and to protect the best interests of children.

Parental RightsCustodyVisitationSame-Sex CouplesNontraditional FamiliesEquitable EstoppelJudicial EstoppelPre-Conception AgreementDomestic Relations LawOverruling Precedent
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 10, 2013

Christopher C. v. Bonnie C.

This divorce action between Christopher C. and Bonnie C. addresses equitable distribution, spousal maintenance, and counsel fees. The defendant, Bonnie C., who has a court-appointed guardian due to mental and emotional difficulties, had separated from the plaintiff in 2003 and informally divided marital assets. The court ratified this prior asset division, noting the defendant had dissipated her share. Finding the defendant unable to work and self-support, and the plaintiff capable of employment despite his claims of disability, the court awarded the defendant non-durational permanent maintenance of $2,500 per month and substantial attorney's fees. The plaintiff's motion to suspend or refund temporary maintenance was denied.

DivorceSpousal MaintenanceEquitable DistributionGuardianshipMental Health IssuesAsset DissipationAttorney's FeesFinancial CapacityPermanent MaintenanceMarital Property
References
12
Case No. 2014-1535 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 22, 2017

GBI Acupuncture, P.C. v. GEICO Ins. Co.

The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed an order from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, in a case involving GBI Acupuncture, P.C. and GEICO Ins. Co. GBI Acupuncture, as assignee, sought to recover first-party no-fault benefits, but the Civil Court had denied its motion for summary judgment and partially granted GEICO's cross-motion. The Appellate Term concurred with the Civil Court's findings, holding that GEICO had properly mailed its denial of claim forms. Furthermore, the court found no merit in the plaintiff's arguments concerning the application of the workers' compensation fee schedule in this no-fault benefits dispute.

No-fault benefitsSummary judgmentClaims denialWorkers' compensation fee scheduleAppellate reviewProper mailingCivil courtFirst-party benefitsAssignee claimInsurance dispute
References
2
Case No. 2016-2075 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 16, 2018

UGP Acupuncture, P.C. v. 21st Century Ins. Co.

UGP Acupuncture, P.C., as the assignee of Santana, Nicole, appealed an order from the Civil Court that granted summary judgment to 21st Century Insurance Company. The action sought to recover first-party no-fault benefits. The defendant had dismissed the complaint, arguing that the amounts claimed for acupuncture services after April 1, 2013, exceeded the workers' compensation fee schedule. The Appellate Term affirmed the Civil Court's decision, reiterating its prior holding that insurers may lawfully use the workers' compensation fee schedule for acupuncture services, even if performed by a licensed acupuncturist rather than a chiropractor. Therefore, the order granting summary judgment to the insurer was affirmed.

No-fault benefitsacupuncture servicesworkers' compensation fee schedulesummary judgmentappellate reviewinsurance lawmedical billingfee reduction
References
1
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00600
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 29, 2020

Matter of Sean CJ Ivan W. (Danica W.)

This case concerns an appeal by the mother, Danica W., from an order terminating her parental rights to her child, Noel Sean CJ Ivan W. The Family Court, Queens County, found that the mother permanently neglected the child and transferred guardianship and custody to Little Flower Children and Family Services of New York and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for adoption. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that the petitioner demonstrated diligent efforts to strengthen the parent-child relationship. However, the mother failed to adequately plan for the child's future despite these efforts. The appellate court also agreed that terminating parental rights and freeing the child for adoption was in the child's best interests, rejecting a suspended judgment.

Parental RightsPermanent NeglectChild WelfareAdoptionFamily LawAppellate DivisionGuardianshipDiligent EffortsBest Interests of ChildSocial Services Law
References
9
Case No. 2017-905 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 02, 2019

BQE Acupuncture, P.C. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

This case involves an appeal by BQE Acupuncture, P.C. against State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. after the Civil Court granted State Farm's motion for summary judgment and denied BQE Acupuncture's cross-motion. BQE Acupuncture sought to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, but State Farm asserted that the amounts claimed exceeded the workers' compensation fee schedule. The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed the Civil Court's order. The court reiterated its prior holding that insurers may properly utilize the workers' compensation fee schedule for acupuncture services performed by chiropractors when determining reimbursement for licensed acupuncturists.

No-Fault BenefitsAcupuncture ServicesWorkers' Compensation Fee ScheduleSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewInsurance DisputeFee ReductionChiropractic ServicesAssigned BenefitsCivil Court Decision
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Ashley W.

The children Ashley W and Wrenggor W, natives of Haiti, appealed a Family Court, Nassau County order denying their guardianship petition by their paternal aunt, Verdele F, and their motion for special immigrant juvenile status. The Family Court's denial without a hearing was based on the uncle's past conviction. The appellate court dismissed Verdele F.'s appeal but reversed the order concerning Ashley W and Wrenggor W. The case was remitted for a hearing and new determination, as the uncle's criminal record was deemed not an automatic bar.

GuardianshipSpecial Immigrant Juvenile StatusFamily Court ActChild WelfareParental AbuseChild NeglectAbandonmentBest Interests of the ChildCriminal RecordAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. 2013-2706 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 19, 2016

NYS Acupuncture, P.C. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

This case, NYS Acupuncture, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., concerned an appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County. The plaintiff, NYS Acupuncture, P.C., sought assigned first-party no-fault benefits from State Farm, which had moved for summary judgment arguing full payment according to the workers' compensation fee schedule. The Civil Court initially granted State Farm's motion. On appeal, NYS Acupuncture, P.C. contended that the fee schedule reductions were improper. The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed the prior ruling, finding that State Farm adequately demonstrated it had fully compensated the plaintiff for acupuncture services based on the applicable workers' compensation fee schedule for services performed by chiropractors, referencing Great Wall Acupuncture, P.C. v Geico Ins. Co.

Workers' Compensation Fee ScheduleNo-Fault BenefitsAcupuncture ServicesChiropractorsSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewInsurance DisputeFee Schedule ReductionAssigned BenefitsMedical Billing
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 4,678 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