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
May 01, 1985

Spoon v. American Agriculturalist, Inc.

Celeste Spoon, an assistant circulation manager, filed a lawsuit against her employer, American Agriculturalist, Inc., and her supervisor, Nelson Dunham, alleging sexual harassment including vulgar language and inappropriate physical contact. Spoon reported these incidents to the company's president, Albert Hoefer, Jr., on two occasions. The Supreme Court at Special Term initially granted American's motion for partial summary judgment, dismissing claims related to Executive Law § 296, vicarious liability, and a derivative claim by Spoon's husband, arguing that the employer lacked sufficient notice of the harassment. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, finding that Spoon's conflicting deposition testimony and affidavit created a triable issue of fact regarding whether American was aware of Dunham's conduct and failed to take appropriate corrective action. Consequently, the appellate court reinstated the dismissed causes of action and the derivative claim, asserting that the doctrine of respondeat superior could apply given the employer's potential knowledge and inaction.

Sexual HarassmentEmployer LiabilityVicarious LiabilityRespondeat SuperiorSummary JudgmentExecutive LawWorkers' CompensationNotice RequirementIntentional TortLoss of Consortium
References
12
Case No. 532194
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 10, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Marc Trombino

Claimant Marc Trombino, an iron worker, filed a workers' compensation claim in September 2016 for work-related lung conditions, including silicosis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, naming FMB Inc. as his employer. The claim was initially indexed against Phoenix Insurance Co., then corrected to Liberty Insurance Corporation after an investigation. Liberty disputed coverage, but a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found prima facie evidence and established the claim, finding an occupational disease and permanent total disability. Liberty appealed, belatedly raising a lack of policy coverage for the work location. The Board remitted the matter for a hearing on coverage, during which Ace American Insurance Company was put on notice. The WCLJ and subsequently the Board invoked the doctrine of laches, barring Liberty from denying coverage due to its inexcusable delay in raising the defense and the resultant prejudice to Ace American. The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseSilicosisChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseLaches DoctrineInsurance Coverage DisputeAppellate ReviewPrima Facie EvidencePermanent Total DisabilityMedical Expert Testimony
References
7
Case No. ADJ10452586
Regular
Sep 24, 2018

CONSTANTINO MARTINEZ vs. BLUEWATER GRILL, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC.

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer in four sentences: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding injury AOE/COE. The Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's reliance on the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) opinion, finding no persuasive reason to deviate. Defendants' arguments that the AME's opinion was based on an inadequate history or was conclusory were rejected. The Board also refused to consider a neurologic report procured after trial, as discovery had closed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical EvaluatorWCJ reportsubstantial medical evidencePetition for RemovalPetition for Change VenueApplication for Adjudication of ClaimFindings and AwardInjury AOE/COE
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. Delphi Energy & Engine Management Systems, Inc.

Plaintiff Mortess Johnson, an African-American woman, sued her employer, DELPHI ENERGY and ENGINE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC., for racial discrimination. She alleged lower wages, lack of promotion, lower classifications, inadequate equipment and training, and being approached about retirement, unlike non-African-American employees, over her thirty-year tenure ending in 1997. Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing her claims were time-barred and that she failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, as her statistical evidence alone was insufficient and she did not apply for promotions. The court granted the defendant's motion, finding plaintiff's claims regarding a continuing violation were conclusory and her reliance on statistics alone, without proof of applying for promotions, failed to overcome the legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for her lack of advancement.

Racial DiscriminationEmployment DiscriminationSummary JudgmentTitle VIIContinuing Violation DoctrineStatute of LimitationsPrima Facie CaseDisparate TreatmentStatistical EvidenceFailure to Promote
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

National Union Fire Insurance v. Great American E&S Insurance

Plaintiff Ethical Culture Fieldston School (ECF) and Tishman, the project manager, were named additional insureds on Solar's general liability policy with Great American. Solar employee, Lisa Best, was injured on site. While Solar filed workers' compensation, notice to Great American about Best's personal injury lawsuit against Tishman and ECF, and Solar's subsequent impleading, was delayed. Tishman and ECF sought a declaratory judgment that Great American was obligated to defend and indemnify them, and Solar cross-claimed. Great American moved for summary judgment, asserting untimely notice. The court found Solar's delay of over a year in notifying Great American was untimely and that Solar's belief of nonliability was unreasonable, especially given its contractual indemnification obligations. Consequently, Great American was not obligated to provide coverage to Solar in the underlying action.

Insurance Coverage DisputeTimely Notice RequirementCondition PrecedentDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifySummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityContractual IndemnificationAdditional Insured StatusConstruction Site Injury
References
5
Case No. ADJ3058631 (FRE 0225238) ADJ4053535 (FRE 0206567)
Regular
May 01, 2018

JOE GUTIERREZ vs. CLOVIS SANGER CABINET MANUFACTURING AND AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal filed by defendants Clovis Sanger Cabinet Manufacturing and American Claims Management. The Board found that defendants failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from an interim order vacating a prior deposition order. Furthermore, the Board determined that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The matter is scheduled for a Mandatory Settlement Conference where the deposition issue can be revisited.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDepositionVacated OrderDiscoveryEx Parte
References
2
Case No. CV-23-0928
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 07, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Patricio Herrera

Claimant Patricio Herrera appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that disallowed his claim for benefits, alleging he contracted COVID-19 during employment with American Badge, Inc. The Board initially established the claim but found no causally-related lost time, then later found no work-related COVID-19 contraction. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that a compensable COVID-19 claim requires demonstrating specific exposure or an elevated risk in the work environment. The court found that Herrera failed to provide sufficient evidence, as his symptoms appeared before those of most coworkers, and the employer implemented safety protocols. Therefore, the Board's conclusion was supported by substantial evidence.

COVID-19 claimWorkers' Compensation Board appealCausally-related injuryOccupational exposureInfection at workplaceSubstantial evidence reviewClaim disallowanceAppellate affirmationEmployer safety protocolsMedical deposition testimony
References
8
Case No. claim No. 1, claim No. 2
Regular Panel Decision

Colley v. Endicott Johnson Corp.

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision concerning two claims. The claimant suffered a back injury in 1985, and that claim was closed in 1986. In 2004, while working in Ohio for MCS Carriers, the claimant sustained another back injury. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge ruled that the 1985 claim was barred from reopening by Workers’ Compensation Law § 123 and that New York lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the 2004 claim. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed these rulings, leading to this appeal. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, confirming the applicability of § 123 to the 1985 claim due to lapsed statutory limits and concluding that insufficient significant contacts existed to confer New York jurisdiction over the 2004 out-of-state injury.

Workers' CompensationJurisdictionStatute of LimitationsReopening ClaimOut-of-state InjurySignificant ContactsAppellate ReviewBack InjuryTruck DriverNew York Law
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 28, 1997

Lurzer GMBH v. American Showcase, Inc.

Lurzer GMBH sued American Showcase, Inc. and The One Club For Art & Copy, Inc. for various claims, including trademark infringement, false advertising, and breach of contract. American had previously initiated arbitration regarding a breach of contract claim. Defendants moved to stay Lurzer's lawsuit pending arbitration, while Lurzer cross-moved to stay or dismiss the arbitration. The Court denied the defendants' motion to stay except for specific breach of contract, fiduciary duty, and good faith/fair dealing claims, finding the arbitration clause in the 1987 Agreement valid and broadly applicable to contract-related disputes, but not trademark ownership disputes. The Court also denied Lurzer's motion to stay or dismiss American's arbitration claim regarding advertising page limits, confirming the arbitration clause's applicability and the nature of the claim as non-past due moneys.

Arbitration AgreementTrademark DisputeContract InterpretationBreach of Fiduciary DutyCovenant of Good Faith and Fair DealingStay of ProceedingsFraudulent InducementFederal Arbitration ActScope of ArbitrationAdvertising Contract
References
7
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00302 [135 AD3d 572]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 2016

Domaszowec v. Residential Management Group LLC

Plaintiff Tracy Domaszowec's decedent died from a fall while cleaning a window on the 13th floor of an apartment building. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified a Supreme Court order, granting plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on her Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Residential Management Group LLC and 40 Fifth Avenue Corporation (40 Fifth defendants), the building owner and manager. The court found the decedent was engaged in "commercial window washing," thereby making Labor Law § 240 (1) applicable. The court affirmed the dismissal of Labor Law § 202 against Veronica Bulgari and Stephen Haimo due to lack of exclusive control, and common-law negligence claims against T&L Contracting of N.Y., Inc. and Greenpoint Woodworking Inc. due to the lack of an exception to the contractual obligation rule. Issues of fact precluded summary judgment on negligence claims against Panorama Windows, Ltd., and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was deemed inapplicable to certain defendants.

Window cleaner fatalityScaffold LawSummary judgment appealAppellate Division First DepartmentCommercial vs. routine window washingLabor Law applicabilityContractual tort liabilityRes ipsa loquitur in negligencePunitive damages dismissalExpert witness evidence
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 19,708 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