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. CV-23-1061
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Seosi Song

Claimant Seosi Song, an assistant plan examiner, appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that denied her claim for workers' compensation benefits. Song alleged that she sustained physical injuries to her back, right knee, and right wrist, as well as psychological injuries, due to working unusually prolonged hours in a static position from home since April 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge disallowed the claim, and the Board affirmed, finding that Song did not establish a causally-related occupational disease or accidental injury. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the medical evidence was insufficient to establish a recognizable link between Song's condition and a distinctive feature of her occupation, or that her injuries resulted from unusual environmental conditions. The court also found no error in the Board's decision to disregard speculative medical evidence regarding psychological injuries.

Occupational Disease ClaimAccidental Injury ClaimRemote Work InjuriesCausation Medical EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Board AffirmationAppellate Division DecisionPhysical Injury ClaimsMental Health ClaimsBurden of Proof ClaimantStatic Position Work
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Song v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.

Dr. Samuel Song was terminated by Ives Laboratories, Inc., leading him to file a discrimination charge with the EEOC, which was referred to the SDHR. The SDHR dismissed his complaint for administrative convenience. Song subsequently sued, alleging national origin discrimination under federal civil rights acts and the New York State Human Rights Law. The defendant moved for partial summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the Section 1981 claim and the state law claim. The court granted dismissal of the Section 1981 claim, applying the precedent of Patterson v. McLean Credit Union retroactively. However, the court denied the dismissal of the Human Rights Law claim, affirming that an administrative convenience dismissal by the SDHR preserves the right to sue and that exercising pendent jurisdiction was appropriate.

Employment DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationCivil Rights Act of 1866Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964New York State Human Rights LawRetroactive Application of LawPendent JurisdictionElection of RemediesAdministrative Convenience DismissalSummary Judgment
References
40
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 05610 [232 AD3d 1005]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2024

Matter of Song v. City of N.Y. Dept. of Bldgs.

Claimant Seosi Song appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied her claim for benefits. Song alleged physical and psychological injuries from working prolonged hours in a static position from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially disallowed the claim, a decision affirmed by the Board. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding insufficient competent medical evidence to establish a causally-related occupational disease or accidental injuries that developed over time. The court also found the medical evidence regarding psychological injuries to be unconvincing and speculative.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsOccupational DiseaseAccidental InjuryCausationMedical Evidence SufficiencyPsychological InjuriesWork-from-HomeClaim DenialAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Board Appeal
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Green Hills (USA), L.L.C. v. Aaron Streit, Inc.

Green Hills, LLC brought an action against Aaron Streit, Inc. and Certified Environments, Inc. for violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and New York Navigation Law, along with other common law provisions. The dispute arose after Green Hills purchased a property from Streit's, which was previously inspected by CEI, and subsequently discovered leaked heating oil from underground storage tanks. Green Hills alleges that Streit's misrepresented the property's environmental condition and CEI failed to detect the hazards. Defendants moved to dismiss various counts of the complaint, with Streit's arguing lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim under RCRA, and CEI arguing the economic loss rule bars certain state-law claims. The court denied both defendants' motions to dismiss, finding sufficient allegations for an RCRA claim and exercising supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims against CEI. The court also granted Green Hills' cross-motion to amend its complaint.

RCRAEnvironmental LawHazardous WasteUnderground Storage TanksContaminationNew York Navigation LawMotions to DismissSubject Matter JurisdictionFailure to State a ClaimSupplemental Jurisdiction
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Fahrson (Commr. of Labor)

Claimant, an insurance agent, sought unemployment insurance benefits after his employment with Aaron Casey Insurance Agency ended. The Department of Labor determined he was an employee, making Aaron Casey Insurance liable for contributions. Aaron Casey Insurance appealed, arguing claimant was an independent contractor. Both an Administrative Law Judge and the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirmed the initial determination. The appellate court found substantial evidence supporting an employer-employee relationship, citing requirements for work hours, in-office duties, compensation structure, training, and sales quotas. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the Board's decisions.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployee ClassificationIndependent ContractorEmployer LiabilityAppellate ReviewControl TestInsurance IndustryLabor LawAdministrative DeterminationSales Agent
References
7
Case No. MON 0255649
Regular
Dec 27, 2007

IN SOON SONG vs. WINDSOR MANOR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied In Soon Song's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior finding that her psychiatric injury claim was barred by Labor Code section 3208.3(h). This section excludes claims substantially caused by lawful, non-discriminatory, good-faith personnel actions. The Board adopted the Judge's report, which detailed how Song's employment issues, including disciplinary actions and a workplace conflict investigation, constituted such actions. Defendant's request for sanctions was also denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDWINDSOR MANORMON 0255649LAO 0771737ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATIONPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code 5813sanctionsFindings and OrderLabor Code section 3208.3(h)
References
2
Case No. ADJ8615321
Regular
Jul 18, 2013

AARON SANCHEZ vs. UPRINT, APPLIED RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has dismissed Aaron Sanchez's petition for reconsideration of a May 6, 2013 decision. The petitioner, Aaron Sanchez, voluntarily withdrew this petition. Consequently, the Board has formally ordered the dismissal of the reconsideration request. This action resolves the pending reconsideration matter in the case.

Petition for ReconsiderationWithdrawnDismissedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantsVan Nuys District OfficeDecision DateOpinion and OrderRonnie G. Caplane
References
0
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07712
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2020

Matter of Schlossberg

Aaron M. Schlossberg, an attorney, was publicly censured by the Appellate Division, First Department, for professional misconduct. The charges stemmed from a May 2018 incident in a Manhattan delicatessen where Schlossberg verbally confronted staff and a patron for speaking Spanish, making offensive remarks and threatening to call Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). He admitted to violating Rules of Professional Conduct rule 8.4 (h) by engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness as a lawyer. The parties jointly moved for discipline by consent, agreeing to a public censure, which the court imposed. The court also granted Schlossberg's cross-motion to seal audio-visual recordings of the incident due to documented threats against him.

Attorney MisconductPublic CensureVerbal TiradeImmigration ThreatsProfessional EthicsRules of Professional ConductDiscipline by ConsentAppellate DivisionFirst DepartmentSealing Order
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 03, 2013

De Ping Song v. 47 Old Country, Inc.

Plaintiffs, salon workers (De Ping Song, Song Li, Yan Zhang, Chun Sen Zhu, Yang Xu, Jie Yi), sued the original defendants (Kui Soon Cho, Bae Kim, Hae Sook Kim, Hye Young Choi, and 47 Old Country, Inc.) for wage, hour, and employment discrimination violations, securing a $474,011.43 judgment in 2012 that remained unpaid. Subsequently, plaintiffs initiated a Rule 69 proceeding to impose successor liability on third-parties Inhae Corp. and Myung Ryun Park. The court applied the 'substantial continuity' test, finding Inhae Corp. liable as a successor due to clear notice of the judgment and the original defendants' likely inability to pay. However, Inhae Corp.'s liability was limited to the original jury verdict amount for unpaid wages, excluding liquidated damages and prejudgment interest, and Myung Ryun Park was not held personally liable.

Wage and Hour LawEmployment DiscriminationSuccessor LiabilityFLSA (Fair Labor Standards Act)Rule 69 FRCPCPLR 5225Substantial Continuity TestDe Facto MergerMere ContinuationFraudulent Transfer
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hoffman v. Aaron Kamhi, Inc.

Jerold Hoffman sued Turn On, Inc. and Aaron Kamhi, Inc. for employment discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), alleging violations related to an arbitration clause in his employment contract. The defendants moved to compel arbitration and dismiss or stay the proceedings, arguing the clause was enforceable and covered discrimination claims. District Judge Chin denied the defendants' motion, ruling that while the arbitration agreement was enforceable, its language was ambiguously phrased and did not specifically reference discrimination claims. The court also noted that the ADA and FMLA did not exist when the contract was signed, meaning Hoffman could not have knowingly waived his rights under those laws. Therefore, the arbitration clause was found not to encompass Hoffman's claims.

Employment discriminationArbitration clauseAmericans with Disabilities ActFamily and Medical Leave ActContract enforceabilityWaiver of statutory rightsAmbiguous contract interpretationFederal Arbitration ActEmployment contractJudicial review of arbitration
References
22
Showing 1-10 of 62 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