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

Tracey Road Equipment, Inc. v. Village of Johnson City

This case involves two appeals from orders and judgments of the Supreme Court in Broome County. Action No. 1 concerned Tracey Road Equipment, Inc.'s request for a declaratory judgment against the Village of Johnson City regarding insurance coverage for a street sweeper involved in an accident. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to Johnson City, finding it not obligated to defend or indemnify Tracey Road, which was affirmed on appeal. Action No. 2 involved the Insurance Company of North America (INA) seeking a declaratory judgment against St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, contending St. Paul was a coinsurer for Johnson City in the same accident. The Supreme Court denied INA's motion, but the appellate court reversed, declaring INA and St. Paul to be coinsurers and obligating St. Paul to pay half of Johnson City's defense and indemnification costs.

Insurance Coverage DisputeDeclaratory JudgmentSummary JudgmentLease Agreement InterpretationCoinsuranceVehicle LiabilityAppellate ReviewContractual IndemnityMotor Vehicle AccidentInsurance Policy Interpretation
References
5
Case No. 2016-3058 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 13, 2018

Johnson v. Hartford Ins. Co.

Hubert I. Johnson appealed an order from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, which denied his motion to vacate a prior order entered May 19, 2015. The May 19, 2015 order had granted Hartford Insurance Company's motion to vacate a default judgment against it and dismissed Johnson's complaint with prejudice, after Johnson failed to oppose the motion. Johnson's current action sought the same sum and was based on the same claim as a previous, discontinued action. The Appellate Term affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that Johnson failed to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for his default and a meritorious cause of action. The court also noted that Johnson's current claim was precluded by res judicata, as it was identical to a claim already asserted and dismissed in a prior action.

Default JudgmentVacate OrderRes JudicataAppellate ReviewCivil CourtMotion to DismissWorkers' Compensation ClaimPro Se AppellantStipulationPrior Action Dismissal
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Milton C. Johnson Co.

Milton O. Johnson Company, a corporation, and its president, Walter Gemmill, were charged with violating Labor Law sections 191(1)(a) and 198-c for failing to pay employee wages and vacation benefits. The company abruptly ran out of funds on October 14, 1970, after its factoring company, Armstrong, ceased financial support. Gemmill, who had intimate knowledge of the company's precarious financial state, informed employees there were no funds for their wages or benefits. The court found the corporation strictly liable for the malum prohibitum violations. Regarding Gemmill, despite his defense that he could not have knowingly permitted the violation due to the unforeseeable action by Armstrong, the court determined that his deep involvement and awareness of the company's financial instability meant he "knew or should have known" of the risk of non-payment. Citing precedents like People v. Trapp and People v. Ahrend Co., the court concluded that the risk of such an event rests with the employer and its managers, not the employees. Consequently, both the corporation and Walter Gemmill were found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of violating the specified Labor Law sections.

Criminal LiabilityWage Non-PaymentVacation BenefitsCorporate Officer LiabilityKnowing PermitFinancial DistressMalum ProhibitumLabor Law ViolationEmployer ResponsibilityOfficer Guilt
References
2
Case No. 7:13-cv-02553-NSR
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 18, 2016

Goldemberg v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc.

Plaintiffs Michael Goldemberg, Annie Le, and Howard Petlack initiated a class action against Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., alleging deceptive labeling of "Aveeno Active Naturals" products. They claimed the "Active Naturals" label falsely implied natural ingredients despite the presence of synthetics, leading consumers to pay a price premium. The court granted class certification for New York, California, and Florida subclasses, with modifications to exclude products not purchased by the named plaintiffs and certain advertising claims. Additionally, the court denied Defendant's motion to preclude Plaintiffs' damages expert's report, deeming its methodology sufficiently reliable for the certification stage. This decision allows the case to proceed as a class action focused on the objective deceptiveness of the product packaging.

Class ActionConsumer ProtectionDeceptive LabelingFalse AdvertisingProduct LiabilityPrice PremiumClass CertificationRule 23Daubert MotionNew York Law
References
92
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re the Arbitration Between Johnson City Professional Firefighters Local 921 & Village of Johnson City

This case addresses whether a 'no-layoff' clause in a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the Village of Johnson City and its firefighter union was subject to arbitration. The Village abolished six firefighter positions citing budgetary necessity, leading the Johnson City Professional Fire Fighters, Local 921 IAFF, to file a grievance and seek to compel arbitration. The Court of Appeals reversed lower court decisions that had compelled arbitration. The court held that the no-layoff clause was not arbitrable because it failed to explicitly, unambiguously, and comprehensively protect against job abolition due to budgetary reasons. The term 'layoff' was deemed ambiguous and undefined within the CBA, rendering the dispute non-arbitrable on public policy grounds, thereby granting the Village's application to stay arbitration.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementNo-Layoff ClausePublic PolicyBudgetary StringenciesJob SecurityMunicipal EmploymentContract InterpretationUnion GrievanceFirefighters
References
5
Case No. 2004 NY Slip Op 24048 [3 Misc 3d 347]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 2004

Johnson v. Hudson Riv. Constr. Co., Inc.

This case addresses motions for summary judgment filed by defendants Hudson River Construction Co., Inc., Albany Asphalt & Aggregates Corp., and Robert C. Higley. The plaintiff, Carlynann V. Johnson, individually and as administratrix of the estate of Warren D. Johnson, sought damages for the death of Warren D. Johnson, who was crushed by a truck at a construction site. Defendants argued that Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103 limited their liability to reckless conduct, eliminating a duty of care. The court denied the motions, holding that defendants failed to demonstrate a lack of duty to Johnson as an employee at a construction site and misapplied VTL § 1103, which does not apply to construction workers. The court also found that the defendants failed to establish that Johnson was the sole proximate cause of his injuries.

Summary Judgment MotionNegligence ActionConstruction Site FatalityWorkplace Safety DutyVehicle and Traffic Law InterpretationProximate Cause DisputeThird-Party LiabilityWrongful Death ClaimEmployer ResponsibilityHighway Construction Accident
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sevenson Environmental Services Inc. v. Sirius America Insurance

This case involves an appeal concerning a declaratory judgment action where plaintiffs Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. and The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, along with defendant Thomas Johnson, Inc. (TJI), sought a declaration that Sirius America Insurance Company (Sirius) was obligated to defend and indemnify TJI in an underlying personal injury action. The Supreme Court initially favored TJI, but the appellate court unanimously reversed this decision. The appellate court found that Sirius validly disclaimed coverage due to TJI's unreasonable 15-month delay in notifying Sirius of the accident, which constituted a breach of a condition precedent to coverage. Additionally, the court ruled that the lower court erred in compelling disclosure of documents Sirius claimed were protected by attorney-client privilege without an in camera review, remitting that aspect for further proceedings.

Declaratory JudgmentInsurance CoverageLate NoticeDisclaimer of CoverageSummary JudgmentAttorney-Client PrivilegeDiscovery DisputeAppellate ReviewCondition PrecedentAgency Relationship
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. Astrue

Thomas Johnson, a pro se plaintiff, sued the Commissioner of Social Security after his application for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) was denied. The District Court, presided over by Judge Telesca, reviewed the ALJ's decision, which found Johnson not disabled despite acknowledging his 'severe' conditions. The court determined that the ALJ improperly evaluated Johnson's schizophrenia, finding it to be a 'listed impairment' under SSA regulations, fulfilling criteria for marked difficulties in social functioning, concentration, persistence, and pace. The court concluded that Johnson's schizophrenia was independently disabling, despite his substance abuse and his own testimony downplaying his mental health issues, and thus reversed the Commissioner's decision, granting judgment to Johnson and remanding the case for calculation of benefits.

SchizophreniaDisability BenefitsSocial Security ActMental ImpairmentResidual Functional CapacityALJ Decision ReviewAppeals CouncilDIBSSIParanoid Schizophrenia
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. Kay

This opinion addresses a motion by Edward Kay, Secretary/Treasurer of Local 1199, to vacate an order issued by Special Master Eric Schmertz. The order directed Kay's faction to pay for Georgiana Johnson, President of Local 1199, to rent the Beacon Theatre for a general delegates meeting. This dispute is part of an ongoing power struggle between Johnson's and Kay's union factions. Kay challenged the Special Master's order on grounds of jurisdiction, standards for injunctive relief, and compliance with Rule 53. The court denied Kay's motion, affirming its jurisdiction based on federal labor law (LMRDA) and the prior involvement of the court. It also found that Johnson had demonstrated irreparable harm and a likelihood of success on the merits for injunctive relief, emphasizing the importance of communication rights within the union.

Union leadership disputeLabor-Management Reporting and Disclosure ActLMRDAIntra-union free speechPreliminary injunctionSpecial MasterUnion delegate assemblyExecutive Council powerCommunication rightsUnion constitutional dispute
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. General Design and Development, Inc.

Jerry Johnson was severely injured in November 1991 when a drill bound, causing him to fall from a stepladder at a construction site. He and his spouse sued the general contractor, General Design and Development, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), among other claims. General subsequently initiated a third-party action against subcontractors Omni Plumbing Company and Thomas P. Pleat Construction, Inc., seeking contribution and indemnification. Plaintiffs were granted partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) by the Supreme Court. The defendants appealed, contending the injuries were not elevation-related. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's order, ruling that the stepladder was inadequate and the accident constituted an elevation-related risk under Labor Law § 240 (1), thus establishing a prima facie violation.

Construction AccidentLabor LawFall from HeightScaffolding LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewPersonal InjuryContractor LiabilitySubcontractor LiabilityIndemnification
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 7,961 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