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. 2024 NY Slip Op 04334 [230 AD3d 811]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 28, 2024

Ramirez v. Pace Univ.

The plaintiff, Jonathan Ramirez, suffered personal injuries after falling from a scaffold during a construction project at Pace University, which had contracted with NYCAN Builders, LLC to manage the project. Ramirez sued both Pace University and NYCAN Builders, LLC, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court granted Ramirez's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the plaintiff established a prima facie case of an elevation-related hazard and proximate cause, and the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact or demonstrate that the motion was premature. The court also held NYCAN Builders, LLC liable as a statutory agent under Labor Law § 240 (1).

Personal InjuryScaffold AccidentConstruction SiteLabor Law ViolationSummary Judgment MotionAppellate DivisionElevation-Related HazardProximate CauseStatutory Agent LiabilityNondelegable Duty
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ramirez v. Rifkin

Plaintiff Reina Ramirez brought an action against Terry and Leah Rifkin alleging failure to pay wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York State Labor Law (NYLL). Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the claims were time-barred and that plaintiff did not perform overtime work. The court denied summary judgment on the FLSA overtime claims and state law claims, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding the statute of limitations, willfulness, and equitable tolling, as well as the amount of time plaintiff worked. However, the court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment on federal and state minimum wage claims from mid-2003 to December 8, 2005, based on the plaintiff's concession.

Fair Labor Standards ActNew York State Labor LawSummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsEquitable TollingOvertime PayMinimum WageDomestic WorkerEmployment LawRecord Keeping
References
43
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00901
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 16, 2023

Matter of Ramirez v. Echevarria

Sarah Ramirez, on behalf of Garrison Echevarria, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that ruled Keamesha Echevarria was entitled to death benefits as the surviving spouse of the deceased Gregory Echevarria. The appeal also challenged the denial of an application for reconsideration by the decedent's fiancée. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's finding that Keamesha Echevarria had not abandoned the decedent, thus qualifying her as a legal spouse for workers' compensation death benefits. The Court found substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion, as the elements required to establish abandonment were not met. Additionally, the Court upheld the denial of the reconsideration application, finding no abuse of discretion.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsSurviving SpouseDeath BenefitsAbandonmentDomestic Relations LawAppellate ReviewBoard Decision AffirmationReconsideration ApplicationCredibility DeterminationSubstantial Evidence
References
9
Case No. ADJ8949346, ADJ10021120
Regular
Aug 16, 2016

ANTHONY BERNARD EDWARDS (DEC) vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration in the case of Anthony Bernard Edwards, deceased, versus the City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles World Airports. This decision allows for further review of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned outcome. All future communications regarding the petition must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not with the district office or through the Electronic Adjudication Management System. The order specifies that trial-level documents unrelated to the reconsideration petition should continue to be e-filed normally.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONGRANTING RECONSIDERATIONCITY OF LOS ANGELESLOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTSVAN NUYS DISTRICT OFFICEDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONSTATUTORY TIME CONSTRAINTSFACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUESJUST AND REASONED DECISION
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

DeLeon v. Ramirez

Plaintiffs, migrant workers, sued G & G Produce Dealers, Inc. and Stanley Gurda for violating the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act (FLCRA) by engaging Modesto Ramirez as an unregistered farm labor contractor in 1976. The defendants failed to ensure Ramirez possessed a valid certificate of registration, as required by law. The court found that Ramirez's activities, including recruiting, soliciting, hiring, furnishing, and transporting migrant workers for a fee, clearly established him as a farm labor contractor under the Act. Despite defendants' claims, evidence showed they engaged and ratified Ramirez's services, including co-signing his application and deducting transportation costs from workers' wages. The court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs, holding G & G Produce and Gurda jointly and severally liable for an intentional violation of the FLCRA and awarding liquidated damages of $500 to each of the 13 plaintiffs, totaling $6,500.

Farm Labor Contractor Registration ActFLCRAMigrant WorkersSummary JudgmentUnregistered ContractorLiquidated DamagesJoint and Several LiabilityEmployer ResponsibilityWorker TransportationRecruitment
References
15
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00021
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 03, 2019

Ramirez v. Elias-Tejada

This consolidated appeal arises from a three-car collision on December 12, 2011, involving a stalled car carrying Fairway employees that was struck by two other vehicles. Plaintiffs, including Pilar Ramirez, Yedmy Batista Peralta, and Delio Polanco (on behalf of his deceased wife), sought damages. Key issues involved the application of the relation back doctrine to add Fairway entities as defendants, the assertion of a Workers' Compensation Law defense, and motions for summary judgment regarding negligence and serious injury. The Appellate Division reviewed several Supreme Court orders, resulting in a mixed decision that reversed in part, affirmed in part, modified in part, and granted in part.

Car accidentThree-car collisionRespondeat superiorWorkers' Compensation LawRelation back doctrineSummary judgmentVicarious liabilityStatute of limitationsPleading errorAmended complaint
References
11
Case No. ADJ1168599
Regular
May 29, 2009

STANLEY ANGEL (Deceased) WANDA ANGEL (Widow) vs. DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, CRAWFORD & COMPANY, TRAVELERS

This case concerns a widow's petition for reconsideration of a denial of death benefits for her husband, Stanley Angel, who died of multiple myeloma. The Appeals Board previously ruled that there was insufficient substantial medical evidence to establish that Mr. Angel's exposure to toxic chemicals during his employment with Dow Chemical Company caused his illness. The widow argued the Board erred in disregarding the opinion of her Qualified Medical Evaluator, Dr. Harrison, and misapplied the burden of proof. However, the Board affirmed its prior decision, finding Dr. Harrison's revised opinion lacked a solid basis and was inconsistent with other evidence regarding the extent and duration of exposure.

Multiple MyelomaIndustrial InjuryToxic Chemical ExposureQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Medical CausationLatency PeriodSubstantial Medical EvidenceBurden of ProofReconsiderationOccupational Medicine
References
7
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 05983
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 06, 2018

Matter of Taylor v. Little Angels Head Start

Claimant, Laverne Taylor, sought workers' compensation benefits for a bilateral knee condition, alleging it was work-related due to changes in her job duties at Little Angels Head Start. She filed her claim over a year after leaving employment, and the employer controverted it due to lack of timely notice under Workers' Compensation Law § 18. Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded benefits, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed the decision, denying the claim. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the employer lacked actual knowledge of a work-related injury and was prejudiced by the delay, as Taylor did not inform them of the work-related nature of her condition until much later.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsTimely NoticeWorkers' Compensation Law § 18Causally-Related InjuryAppellate ReviewBoard DiscretionEmployer KnowledgePrejudiceBilateral Knee ConditionMedical Leave
References
3
Case No. ADJ8564064, ADJ8564068
Regular
Dec 18, 2014

MARIA RAMIREZ vs. PRIORITY BUSINESS SERVICES, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves applicant Maria Ramirez's petition for removal, seeking to undo a notation on a Minute Order from a Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC). Ramirez alleged irreparable harm from an order compelling her to attend a Qualified Medical Evaluation (QME) despite an agreement to use an Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME). The Board denied the petition, finding no evidence that the WCJ ordered a PQME or that Ramirez requested an AME examination with the proposed evaluator. The WCJ correctly took the cases off calendar due to the defendant's timely objection to Ramirez's Declaration of Readiness to Proceed, which relied on a deceased AME's report.

Petition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedAgreed Medical EvaluatorQualified Medical EvaluatorOff CalendarIrreparable HarmSubstantial PrejudiceWCJ OrderMinutes of Hearing
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ramirez v. Pride Development & Construction Corp.

Plaintiff Orfelindo Cordero Ramirez filed an in limine motion seeking to preclude testimony from a witness for third-party defendant Muna Contracting Corporation. The motion arose from a personal injury action where Muna's failure to maintain employee records hindered Ramirez's ability to identify crucial witnesses to his alleged accident. United States Magistrate Judge James Orenstein recommended denying the preclusion request but suggested an alternative remedy: instructing the jury that it may draw an adverse inference against Muna due to its misconduct. District Judge Ross reviewed the Report and Recommendation, found no clear error, and adopted it in its entirety. Consequently, Ramirez's motion to preclude was denied, but the court will instruct the jury to consider an adverse inference against Muna.

In Limine MotionAdverse InferenceSpoliationDiscovery SanctionsRule 37New York Labor LawEmployee RecordsWitness PreclusionMagistrate JudgeReport and Recommendation
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 1,083 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