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

Longo v. Graphic Packaging Corp.

The claimant, a maintenance mechanic, was employed from 1961 to 2001, last by Graphic Packaging Corporation, a subsidiary of Coors Brewing Company. In 2007, he was diagnosed with interstitial lung disease due to workplace asbestos exposure, establishing March 15, 2007, as the date of disablement for workers' compensation benefits. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge determined that Zurich American Insurance Company, the carrier for Coors, was liable, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. Zurich and Graphic Packaging appealed, contending they were denied the right to present proof and that there was a lack of substantial evidence regarding Coors' employer status and Zurich's liability. The court found that Zurich failed to present evidence despite notice and opportunities, and the claimant's uncontroverted testimony provided substantial evidence supporting the Board's determination.

Asbestos exposureInterstitial lung diseaseOccupational diseaseWorkers' compensation benefitsEmployer liabilityInsurance carrier liabilitySubstantial evidenceUncontroverted testimonyWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sweet v. Packaging Corp.

Plaintiff, an employee of A Plus Environmental Services, was injured on October 19, 1995, while removing asbestos roofing for Monahan-Loughlin Inc., a subcontractor for Packaging Corporation of America. The injury occurred when a coworker slipped on wet asbestos fibers from previous rain, causing the full weight of a roof section to shift onto plaintiff. Plaintiff had previously complained about the slippery conditions without remedy. Subsequently, plaintiff filed a claim under Labor Law § 241 (6). Defendants moved for summary judgment, which the Supreme Court denied. On appeal, the court affirmed the denial of summary judgment, ruling that while the asbestos fibers were an integral part of the worksite, the precipitation causing them to be slippery was not, making the defendants' failure to remedy the condition actionable under 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d).

Workers' CompensationConstruction AccidentSlippery ConditionsLabor LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewWorkplace SafetyAsbestos RemovalRoof WorkPersonal Injury
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ferber v. Des. L. Packaging Corp.

A sales manager, referred to as the Claimant, sustained injuries in a head-on collision while driving to get snow tires for his wife's car, which he occasionally used for business travel. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge denied benefits, ruling he had deviated from his employment. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding that maintaining the vehicle for potential business use was within the scope of employment, especially since he was en route to a work-related appointment afterward. The employer appealed this decision. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that the Board properly found the claimant was within the course of his employment at the time of the accident.

Workers' CompensationScope of EmploymentDeviation from EmploymentBusiness TravelVehicle MaintenanceWork-related InjuryAppellate ReviewEmployer LiabilityPersonal ErrandAccident Compensation
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 1999

Johnson v. Packaging Corp.

This case involves an appeal from an order granting partial summary judgment to Kevin C. Johnson, a laborer who sustained serious injuries after falling 9.5 feet from a roof while performing asbestos removal. Johnson, employed by subcontractor A Plus Environmental Services, Inc., sued the general contractor, Monahan-Loughlin, Inc., and the building owner, Packaging Corporation of America, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240(1), 241(6), 200, and common-law negligence due to the absence of safety devices and exposed electrical wires. The Appellate Division affirmed the grant of partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim, emphasizing that a fall from an elevation without safety devices constitutes a clear violation, irrespective of the precise cause of the fall. The court also found sufficient factual issues regarding the defendants' notice of the dangerous electrical condition to deny their cross-motions for summary judgment and indemnification on the other claims, thus requiring further proceedings.

Labor Law § 240(1)Elevation-related hazardFall protectionConstruction accidentSummary judgment motionAppellate affirmationGeneral contractor liabilityOwner liabilitySubcontractor negligenceElectrical hazard
References
12
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 00831 [224 AD3d 1051]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2024

Matter of Golisano v. ABX Innovative Packaging Solutions LLC

The claimant, Jason R. Golisano, filed for workers' compensation benefits in August 2021 for injuries to his left wrist and hand. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim for a left wrist injury. The employer and its carrier (appellants) sought review of this decision by the Workers' Compensation Board, but their application was filed beyond the 30-day limit. The Board denied the application as untimely, and the carrier appealed. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding no abuse of discretion in denying the untimely application, despite the carrier's arguments regarding a short delay and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Workers' CompensationTimelinessApplication for ReviewBoard DiscretionAppellate ReviewCOVID-19Procedural IssueWCLJ DecisionEmployer-Carrier AppealNew York Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 31, 2006

Magadan v. Interlake Packaging Corp.

The plaintiff, a factory worker, sustained personal injuries while operating an S3A 7/8” Book Stitcher, leading to a lawsuit against the manufacturer (Interlake Packaging Corporation), its successor (Samuel Strapping Services), and the seller (Suburban Graphic Supply Corp.). The injury occurred when her finger was caught by the machine's needle due to an improperly adjusted finger guard. Initially, the Supreme Court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding no design defect. However, the appellate court partially reversed this decision, concluding that triable issues of fact existed regarding the defendants' failure to provide adequate warnings about operating the machine without proper finger guard adjustment. Furthermore, the court found triable issues concerning the defendants' post-sale duty to warn about safety modifications.

Personal InjuryProducts LiabilityNegligenceDesign DefectFailure to WarnSummary JudgmentAppealFactory Worker InjuryMachine SafetyPost-Sale Duty to Warn
References
9
Case No. ADJ2661017
Regular
May 17, 2010

HECTOR AGUILAR vs. AMZ PACKAGING, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a dispute over the division of attorneys' fees between former counsel, Lionel Giron, and current counsel, Charles Clark, from a settlement of $25,000. The WCJ initially awarded $600 to Giron and $3,150 to Clark. After a contested hearing involving allegations of fraud by Clark against Giron, the WCJ issued an order vacating the prior division. Due to contested notice issues and alleged prior commitments preventing Giron's appearance at a subsequent hearing, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration. The Board rescinded the WCJ's February 23, 2010 Findings and Order and returned the matter for a new hearing to allow Giron to present his case on fee division.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ2661017LAO 0841910AMZ PackagingInc.Everest National Insurance CompanyLien claimantReconsiderationWCJ Findings and OrderCompromise and Release
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 29, 2014

City of New York v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc.

The City and State of New York sued FedEx Ground, alleging the knowing delivery of unstamped cigarettes from 2005 to 2012, which violated the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act (CCTA), the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT Act), the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), and New York Public Health Law § 1399-ii, and constituted a public nuisance. FedEx Ground filed a motion to dismiss these claims. The court denied the motion to dismiss the CCTA, RICO, and RICO conspiracy claims, finding sufficient grounds for aggregation of sales, pattern of predicate acts, participation in the enterprise, injury to business or property, and proximate causation. However, the court granted the motion to dismiss the New York Public Health Law claim, ruling that the 2013 amendment, which would grant the City and State enforcement authority, did not apply retroactively. The court also granted the motion to dismiss the public nuisance claim, concluding that it primarily involved alleged tax evasion, which is already subject to comprehensive regulation, rather than unauthorized shipments to minors.

Contraband CigarettesCigarette TraffickingRICO ActPublic Health LawPublic NuisanceMotion to DismissTax EvasionStatutory InterpretationRetroactive ApplicationProximate Cause
References
42
Case No. ADJ20165742
Regular
Jul 18, 2025

DEBRA SILVEIRA vs. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INCORPORATED

Applicant Debra Silveira sought reconsideration of an April 29, 2025 Findings of Fact and Order, which deemed a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel valid despite being requested by defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Incorporated, with an incorrect claim number. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the prior decision, and substituted new findings. The Board ruled that strict compliance with Administrative Director Rule 30 regarding complete and correct claim numbers for QME panel requests is required to ensure due process and prevent conflicting or overlapping panels. Consequently, the defendant's panel (7773036) was deemed invalid, and the applicant's panel (7775940) was declared valid.

QME panel validityincorrect claim numberAD Rule 30due processadministrative law judgePetition for Reconsiderationremoval standardDWC Medical Unitprocedural defectinadvertent error
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rocket Jewelry Box, Inc. v. Noble Gift Packaging, Inc.

Rocket Jewelry Box, Inc. petitioned the court to confirm an arbitration award against Noble Gift Packaging, Inc., while Noble cross-petitioned to vacate the award. The arbitration stemmed from disputes over a patent license agreement for jewelry boxes, which Rocket terminated, leading to litigation and a subsequent arbitration where Noble was found to have breached the agreement. Noble argued for vacatur on grounds that the award was not final, the arbitrators exceeded their powers, and they manifestly disregarded the law concerning waiver. The court, presided over by Judge Mukasey, found that the arbitration award was final, as Noble's reserved patent invalidity defense would not affect its royalty obligations due to lack of prior notification. The court also determined that the arbitrators did not exceed their powers in allocating arbitration costs, nor did they manifestly disregard the law by handling the waiver issue as they did. Consequently, Rocket's petition to confirm the arbitration award was granted, and Noble's cross-petition to vacate was denied.

ArbitrationPatent LawContract DisputesRoyalty AgreementsJudicial ReviewFederal Arbitration ActJurisdictionAward ConfirmationVacaturLicensee Estoppel
References
39
Showing 1-10 of 72 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