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. 2017 NY Slip Op 08637 [156 AD3d 463]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 12, 2017

Matter of Michelle C. v. Jerome Alvin M.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Family Court order that granted a mother's motion to deny her incarcerated ex-husband in-person visitation with their child at his correctional facility. The father, serving a 30-year sentence for attempted murder, appealed the decision. The court found that in-person visitation would be detrimental to the child's welfare due to the child's severe special needs, including hydrocephalus, developmental delays, and behavioral issues. Additionally, the six-hour travel distance and the father's lack of understanding of the child's condition were factors. The court modified the order to allow the father to maintain contact through letters, phone calls, and video communication.

Child welfareVisitation rightsParental incarcerationSpecial needs childModification of orderBest interests of the childCorrectional facility visitationFamily lawAppellate reviewParental rights
References
5
Case No. ADJ4455621 (AHM 0086346)
Regular
May 14, 2014

ALVIN CAVALIER vs. BABCOCK & WILCOX; ACE USA, Administered By ESIS, INC.

This case involves Alvin Cavalier's workers' compensation claim against Babcock & Wilcox and its administrator, ACE USA. Cavalier petitioned for reconsideration of a prior decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB has denied Cavalier's petition, adopting the reasoning of the administrative law judge and incorporating it into their order.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportdeny reconsiderationAlvin CavalierBabcock & WilcoxACE USAESISInc.ADJ4455621
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Turner v. New York Rosbruch/Harnik, Inc.

Plaintiffs Todd and Erin Turner sued New York Rosbruch/Harnik (NYRH) and the Estate of Alvin Russell Lewis, an NYRH employee, alleging fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting fraud, and violations of the RICO Act. Plaintiffs claimed Defendants misrepresented investments for short-term, high-interest loans, leading to significant financial hardship. Defendant NYRH moved to dismiss the claims, specifically the civil RICO claim, for failure to state a claim and failure to satisfy pleading requirements. The court granted NYRH's motion, dismissing the RICO claim with prejudice due to insufficient pleading under Rule 9(b) and failure to establish a cognizable RICO violation. The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice. The request for leave to replead was denied as futile.

FraudRICO ActMotion to DismissPleading RequirementsRule 9(b) FRCPWire FraudBreach of Fiduciary DutySupplemental JurisdictionInvestment FraudFinancial Advisor Misconduct
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 02, 2010

Blyer v. ONE STOP KOSHER SUPERMARKET, INC.

Alvin Blyer, Regional Director of NLRB Region 29, petitioned the District Court for interim relief against One Stop Kosher Supermarket, Inc. under 29 U.S.C. § 160(j). The Director sought an order compelling One Stop to bargain with Local 338, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, after One Stop failed to honor a recognition agreement. The administrative law judge (ALJ) found the recognition agreement binding. The District Court granted the petition, finding reasonable cause for unfair labor practices and irreparable harm to the Union's collective bargaining rights, ordering One Stop to provide information and bargain, but stipulating that any agreement not be implemented until the NLRB's final decision.

National Labor Relations BoardUnfair Labor PracticesInterim InjunctionCollective BargainingUnion RecognitionLabor LawDistrict CourtSection 10(j)Employer-Union RelationsMandatary Injunction
References
14
Case No. 2014 NY Slip Op 08400 [123 AD3d 661]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2014

Garcia v. Market Associates

The plaintiffs, Alvin Garcia and his wife, initiated an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by Mr. Garcia at a demolition site. While operating a water truck to control dust, a concrete slab collapsed beneath the vehicle, causing it to fall to the basement level. The plaintiffs alleged violations of Labor Law sections 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), along with common-law negligence. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to the defendants on most claims. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, denying summary judgment to Market Associates and Rockstone Development Corp. regarding the Labor Law section 200 and common-law negligence claims. However, the dismissal of Labor Law sections 240 (1) and 241 (6) claims against all defendants, and all claims against Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., were affirmed.

Construction AccidentLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Labor Law § 200Common-law NegligenceSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityMeans and MethodsSafe Place to WorkDemolition Site
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Pond

Defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of sodomy, sexual abuse, and endangering the welfare of a child. The primary contention was that his confession should have been suppressed due to limited mental capacity and alleged police coercion. The court found that despite the defendant's mild retardation, he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his Miranda rights, citing his prior experience with the criminal justice system. Additionally, the court acknowledged the improper admission of hearsay testimony as bolstering but deemed it harmless error due to overwhelming other evidence, including the victim's testimony and the defendant's confession. Consequently, the judgment was affirmed.

SodomySexual AbuseEndangering Welfare of a ChildMiranda RightsConfession VoluntarinessMental CapacityHearsay TestimonyBolstering ErrorHarmless ErrorCriminal Justice System
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 28, 1984

Pond v. Oliver

The employer and its carrier appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision granting disability benefits to a pregnant secretary. The claimant stopped working due to paint fumes posing a hazard to her fetus, on advice from her obstetrician. Despite the employer's claim of discontinuing painting, fumes persisted. The claimant later underwent a Caesarean section and remained disabled. The Board found her disability was connected to her pregnancy and the hazardous work environment, rejecting arguments of voluntary withdrawal or availability of other employment. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence and consistent with the Disability Benefits Law.

pregnancy disabilityworkplace hazardpaint fumesdisability benefitsWorkers' Compensation Lawcaesarean sectionmedical advicevoluntary withdrawallabor marketcredibility question
References
2
Case No. ADJ2773730 (VNO 0546451) ADJ8941760
Regular
Nov 25, 2019

ALVIN BLADES vs. CITY OF PASADENA

This case involves an applicant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award primarily concerning the weekly payment rate for permanent disability. Initially, the Board affirmed an award but later amended it to reflect a stipulation for a $230 weekly rate. The applicant's subsequent petitions, including one allegedly misplaced by the WCAB system, argued for higher statutory rates of $270 and $310.50 per week. The Board granted further reconsideration, finding the applicant's petitions timely and agreeing that an oversight occurred regarding the correct payment rates, thus amending the award to reflect the higher statutory amounts.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAlvin BladesCity of PasadenaADJ2773730ReconsiderationFindings of FactPermanent DisabilityLife PensionAttorney's FeesStipulated Award
References
1
Case No. ADJ2007566
Regular
Dec 10, 2012

ALVIN HARPER vs. TAMPA BAY BUCANEERS

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by defendant Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is granting this petition. This action is being taken to allow for a more thorough review of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB needs this additional time and potential further proceedings to ensure a just and reasoned decision is issued.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationAlvin HarperTampa Bay BuccaneersPermissibly Self-InsuredStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual IssuesLegal IssuesJust and Reasoned Decision
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fitzgerald v. Niles Bement Pond Co.

MISSING

References
0
Showing 1-10 of 38 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