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

Mirrer v. Hevesi

The petitioner, a police sergeant for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, sought accidental and performance of duty disability retirement benefits after slipping from a fire truck due to foam on his shoes. The respondent Comptroller denied his applications, finding that the incident was not an 'accident' under the Retirement and Social Security Law, as slipping on foam was an inherent risk of his job duties, and that he was not permanently incapacitated from performing his duties. The court affirmed the Comptroller's determination, citing substantial evidence supporting both findings, including the resolution of conflicting expert medical opinions regarding permanent disability. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Disability Retirement BenefitsAccidental DisabilityPerformance of Duty DisabilityPolice SergeantFirefighting OperationsLa Guardia AirportSlip and FallInherent Risk of EmploymentCervical Spine InjuryExpert Medical Evidence
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 07, 2008

Koebel v. ew York State Comptroller

Petitioner, Rose J.E., sought accidental disability retirement benefits due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) stemming from her observation and subsequent emergency duties related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Respondent Comptroller denied her application, citing a failure to provide timely written notice as mandated by Retirement and Social Security Law § 63 (c). The Supreme Court dismissed her CPLR article 78 petition, a decision that was subsequently appealed. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, rejecting the petitioner's arguments that the widely-known events of 9/11, oral notice, her mental state as good cause, or an executive order suspending time limitations, satisfied or excused the notice requirement. The court found that the statute specifically requires notice of the member's injuries and incapacity, which the events of 9/11 alone would not convey. Furthermore, the court found no merit in the arguments regarding oral notice or the applicability of good cause exceptions or the Executive Order to extend the notice period.

Accidental Disability Retirement BenefitsPost-Traumatic Stress Disorder9/11 Terrorist AttacksTimely Written NoticeRetirement and Social Security LawCPLR Article 78Good Cause ExceptionExecutive OrderWorkers' Compensation LawAdministrative Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brynien v. Governor's Office of Employee Relations

This case is an appeal of a Supreme Court judgment that dismissed petitioner’s applications to review denials of out-of-title work grievances. The petitioner, representing five state employees at the Office of Mental Health (OMH), alleged that employees were improperly assigned duties of a Treatment Team Leader, a higher-grade position, violating their collective bargaining agreement and Civil Service Law § 61 (2). OMH and the Governor’s Office of Employee Relations (GOER) denied the grievances, finding the duties appropriate to the employees' titles. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, holding that GOER's determination was rational. The court found that the assigned duties were a reasonable extension of the employees' in-title duties and that the employees did not meet the minimum requirements for the higher-grade Treatment Team Leader position.

Out-of-title workGrievanceCivil Service LawCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee ClassificationJob DutiesSupervisory DutiesRational Basis ReviewAdministrative LawJudicial Review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between County of Broome & New York State Law Enforcement Officers Union, District Council 82

This case involves an appeal from an order that granted petitioners' application to stay arbitration. The dispute originated when correction officer Tim Mooney was reassigned from courthouse duties by an Administrative Judge. The respondent union filed a grievance on Mooney's behalf, arguing that the reassignment violated a collective bargaining agreement and sought arbitration for his reinstatement. Petitioners, the County of Broome and Sheriff Harder, commenced a proceeding to stay arbitration, contending that public policy prohibits arbitration in this matter. The Supreme Court agreed and granted the application. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding that Mooney's reinstatement would infringe upon the courts' inherent authority to manage judicial functions and would be contrary to strong public policy.

Arbitration StayPublic PolicyCollective Bargaining AgreementJudicial AuthorityCourt ManagementGrievanceEmployee ReassignmentCorrection OfficerBroome CountyAppellate Division
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lahm v. Bloomberg

The petitioner, a former New York City police officer named Lahm, sought an accident disability retirement (ADR) due to stage III squamous cell carcinoma, claiming it was environmentally induced by his prolonged exposure to toxic debris at the World Trade Center site on September 11, 2001. The Police Department and the Medical Board denied his request for a line-of-duty designation and ADR, asserting no causal relationship, and instead granted him an ordinary disability retirement. The Board of Trustees subsequently denied the ADR application via a tie vote. The court found that the Medical Board failed to consider whether the petitioner's pre-existing condition was aggravated by the WTC exposure. Concluding that the Board of Trustees' denial lacked a rational basis, and noting that the record contained only medical opinions supporting the aggravation claim, the court ruled as a matter of law that the petitioner's cancer was exacerbated by the service-connected September 11, 2001 injury. Consequently, the court granted the petitioner's application, annulled the Board of Trustees' determination, and remanded the matter for recomputation of his retirement allowance with an accident disability retirement.

WTC ExposureCancer AggravationAccident Disability RetirementOrdinary Disability RetirementPolice Pension FundLine-of-Duty InjuryCausation StandardMedical BoardTie Vote AnnulmentExacerbation of Pre-existing Condition
References
7
Case No. ADJ3693493
Regular
Oct 01, 2008

RUSSELL STANSBERY vs. WESTSTAFF, INC, AETNA/TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF ILLINOIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration regarding the extent of permanent disability and attorney's fees. However, the WCAB granted the defendant's petition to reconsider the period of temporary disability. The WCAB amended the original award to reflect that temporary partial disability was payable from July 1, 1999, through December 6, 1999, acknowledging that the applicant did work modified duty for approximately one month after the injury.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderPermanent DisabilityTemporary Disability IndemnityAttorney's FeeQualified Medical ExaminerMedical-Legal ReportApportionmentTemporary Partial Disability
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Molloy v. DiNapoli

The petitioner, a correction officer, sought performance of duty disability retirement benefits after sustaining multiple left shoulder injuries across several work-related incidents. While the New York State and Local Employees’ Retirement System conceded permanent disability, the respondent Comptroller denied the application, concluding that the initial June 6, 2008 incident was not the proximate cause of the disability. Conflicting medical evidence was presented, with orthopedic surgeon Andrew Beharrie linking the disability to the 2008 incident, while independent medical examiner Bradley Wiener attributed the need for surgical intervention to subsequent incidents in 2009 and 2010. The Hearing Officer and Comptroller credited Wiener's opinion, noting the lack of immediate medical treatment after the first incident and the petitioner's return to full duty. The court affirmed the Comptroller's determination, finding it to be supported by rational, fact-based medical opinion and substantial evidence.

Disability RetirementPerformance of DutyCorrection OfficerShoulder InjuryCausal RelationshipMedical EvidenceIndependent Medical ExaminationComptroller's DeterminationSubstantial EvidenceCPLR Article 78
References
6
Case No. ADJ9572711
Regular
May 20, 2019

RENE HINOJOSA vs. NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition and granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the original finding of injury to the psyche and cardiovascular system, including hypertension, but amended the award. Crucially, the Board found that Labor Code section 3212.2 applied due to the applicant's custodial duties, thus precluding apportionment of permanent disability for hypertension and cardiovascular disease under Labor Code section 4663(e). This resulted in an increased permanent disability rating of 73% and entitlement to a life pension.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Orders and Awardstationary engineerpsyche injurycardiovascular systemhypertensionheart trouble presumptionLabor Code Section 3212.2Labor Code Section 4663(e)
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Oshode v. DiNapoli

The petitioner, a correction officer, sought disability and performance of duty disability retirement benefits after being injured in a slip-and-fall incident in January 2009. Her applications were denied by the respondent, who adopted the Hearing Officer's findings that the disability application was untimely and the performance of duty claim lacked proof of an inmate's act. In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, the court affirmed the denial. It ruled that the disability application was indeed untimely, as workers' compensation and vacation pay did not qualify as "on the payroll" payments under Retirement and Social Security Law § 507-a (b) (2). Additionally, the court upheld the denial of performance of duty benefits, noting the petitioner's concession that an inmate did not cause her injury.

Disability Retirement BenefitsPerformance of Duty DisabilityCorrection Officer InjuryTimeliness of ApplicationRetirement and Social Security LawCPLR Article 78Workers' Compensation BenefitsPayroll PaymentsInmate Act RequirementJudicial Review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Talerico v. McCall

A custodial worker, referred to as the petitioner, filed for accidental disability retirement benefits after sustaining injuries from a slip and fall while performing her duties for the County of Onondaga. The respondent denied the application, determining that the incident did not constitute an "accident" under Retirement and Social Security Law § 605, as it occurred during the performance of ordinary employment duties. The petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, arguing that the administrative determination lacked substantial evidence. However, the court found substantial evidence to support the respondent's decision, confirming the denial of benefits and dismissing the petition.

Accidental Disability RetirementCPLR Article 78Slip and FallCustodial WorkerOrdinary Employment DutiesSubstantial Evidence ReviewBenefit DenialPublic Employee BenefitsRetirement and Social Security LawAdministrative Law
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 14,436 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