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
Oct 12, 2010

Gunther v. Capital One, N.A.

Plaintiff Eric Gunther filed a class action against Capital One Bank and Capital One Financial Corporation, alleging improper banking fees. Gunther, a former North Fork Bank customer, became a Capital One Bank account holder after a merger. He claimed Capital One Bank increased fees, including ATM withdrawal and overdraft fees, without proper notice, charged 'Undeliverable Mail Fees,' deceptively marketed 'free checking,' and failed to provide fee schedule notifications. The Court dismissed most of Gunther's breach of contract claims, except for the 'Undeliverable Mail Fees' claim. Claims under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and for unjust enrichment were also dismissed. A New York General Business Law § 349 claim was dismissed with leave to replead. The Court denied dismissal for the declaratory judgment claim against Capital One Bank. All claims against Capital One Financial were dismissed, as the plaintiff failed to establish direct or indirect liability through corporate veil piercing.

Consumer Class ActionBanking FeesBreach of ContractMotion to DismissCorporate Veil PiercingTruth in Savings Act (TISA)Unjust EnrichmentDeclaratory JudgmentStanding to SueNew York General Business Law
References
33
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08303
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 28, 2017

Prevost v. One City Block LLC

Plaintiff Ronald Prevost, a laborer, was injured after slipping on a loose sprinkler pipe at a construction site owned by One City Block LLC. He and his wife sued One City for common-law negligence and Labor Law violations. One City then commenced a third-party action against Island Fire Sprinkler, Inc., the subcontractor responsible for installing the sprinkler system, seeking contractual and common-law indemnification and alleging breach of contract for failure to procure insurance. The Supreme Court denied various summary judgment motions. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the order, granting One City's motion for summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, and granting One City's claim for contractual indemnification by Island Fire. The court also denied Island Fire's motion for summary judgment dismissing One City's claim against it for contractual indemnification and breach of contract for failure to procure insurance. Finally, the Appellate Division affirmed the denial of One City's motion for post-note-of-issue discovery seeking additional independent medical examinations of plaintiff.

Construction accidentLabor LawPremises liabilitySummary judgmentContractual indemnificationBreach of contractInsurance procurementPost-note-of-issue discoveryIndependent medical examinationAppellate procedure
References
16
Case No. 952 F.Supp.2d 638
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2014

United States v. Apple Inc.

Defendant Apple Inc. filed a motion seeking to stay one aspect of an injunctive relief, specifically aiming to disqualify the External Compliance Monitor. Apple argued that the Monitor's conduct, including excessive fees and filing a declaration, demonstrated bias and caused irreparable harm, thus warranting a stay. The Court denied Apple's application for the Monitor's disqualification and the motion for a stay. The judge found that Apple's arguments lacked legal merit and that the company failed to prove it would suffer irreparable harm. The decision underscored the public interest in robust antitrust law enforcement and the Monitor's role in ensuring Apple's compliance.

Antitrust LawExternal MonitorCompliance ProgramInjunctive ReliefStay MotionDisqualificationFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureSherman ActJudicial DiscretionCorporate Governance
References
25
Case No. VNO 0518591
Regular
Feb 13, 2008

DOREEN WARD vs. APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, ESIS, INC.

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the administrative law judge's (WCJ) dismissal of Apple One and ESIS, finding the dismissal was improper without a hearing. The WCJ improperly treated the defendants' petition for dismissal as a motion for judgment on the pleadings, violating procedural rules and due process. The case is returned to the WCJ for actual proceedings on the dismissal petitions and any objections.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardDoreen WardApple One Employment ServicesESIS Inc.Labor Code section 3208.3(d)psychiatric injuryhostile work environmentpetition for dismissaldue processsection 5813
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Apple Mortgage Corp. v. Barenblatt

Apple Mortgage sued four former employees for allegedly copying customer information and using it at a new employer, GuardHill Financial Corporation, asserting claims like breach of contract, unfair competition, and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act violations. The defendants counterclaimed for unpaid commissions and bonuses. The court granted summary judgment dismissing Apple's claims, finding Apple lacked standing after selling its assets to Sterling National Bank. The court partially granted and denied Apple's motion to dismiss the counterclaims, disallowing bonus claims due to discretion and some improper deduction claims due to implied agreement or statute of limitations, but allowing certain commission claims and one improper deduction claim to proceed.

Employee MisappropriationTrade SecretsBreach of ContractUnfair CompetitionComputer Fraud and Abuse ActFiduciary DutyDuty of LoyaltyCommissionsUnpaid WagesSummary Judgment
References
48
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. ADJ3512839 (VNO 0509649)
Regular
Jul 27, 2010

KEIUNTA DIXON vs. APPLE ONE, ACE USA, Administered By ESIS, INC., AIG SUN AMERICA/NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, Administered By CHARTIS CLAIMS, INC.

In *Dixon v. Apple One*, the defendant sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration due to statutory time constraints and the need for further review. This action allows for a more thorough examination of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just decision. The Board will subsequently issue a Decision After Reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGranting ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersFrank M. BrassAlfonso U. Moresi
References
0
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 05053 [208 AD3d 818]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2022

Thorpe v. One Page Park, LLC

Lorenzo Thorpe, an employee at a construction site owned by One Page Park, LLC, sustained injuries after falling into a 14-16 foot deep pit. He commenced a personal injury action against One Page Park, LLC and A-W Coon & Sons, Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to the defendants and denied the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on liability. Upon reargument, the Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the order, denying the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action against One Page Park, LLC, citing elevation-related risk and triable issues of fact. The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1).

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor Law Section 240(1)Elevation-Related HazardSummary Judgment MotionReargumentAppellate ReviewProximate CauseTriable Issue of FactProperty Owner Liability
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 1988

Calhoun v. Big Apple Wrecking Corp.

The defendant, Big Apple Wrecking Corporation, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, which denied their motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action. The underlying injury occurred at a construction site, and the Workers' Compensation Board had previously determined the injury was work-related, providing benefits to the plaintiff's decedent. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, granting summary judgment and dismissing the complaint against Big Apple Wrecking Corporation. The court emphasized that workers' compensation benefits serve as the exclusive remedy for employees injured by co-workers in the same employ, citing Workers’ Compensation Law. Furthermore, the court reiterated that determinations made by the Workers' Compensation Board on questions of fact, including employer-employee relationships, are final and binding under principles of res judicata.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityRes JudicataAppellate ReviewEmployer-Employee RelationshipConstruction Site InjuryNew York LawExclusive RemedyAdministrative Determinations
References
6
Case No. 2008 NY Slip Op 30920(U)
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2008

Silverite Construction Co. v. One Beacon Insurance

Plaintiffs Silverite Construction Company, Inc. and the New York City Department of Environmental Protection's motion for summary judgment was denied, and defendant One Beacon Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment was granted and affirmed. The court rejected plaintiffs' excuse for their 2 1/2-month late notice of a worker's injury, citing evidence such as the worker's removal by ambulance, an accident report, missed work, limited duties upon return, and a filed notice of claim. One Beacon's disclaimer was deemed timely following a brief investigation into the plaintiffs' status as additional insureds. This decision highlights the necessity of timely notification in insurance claims, irrespective of the perceived likelihood of a claim.

Summary JudgmentInsurance LawLate NoticeWorker InjuryAdditional InsuredDisclaimerAppellate ReviewConstruction SiteAccident ReportTimely Notice
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 1,506 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