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

Claim of Giaquinto v. Major Sanitation, Inc.

This case addresses whether a widow's "mother's insurance benefits" under the Social Security Act are subject to offset provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law. The employer and its carrier argued that the $331.30 per month received by the widow, statutorily designated as "mother's insurance benefits," should be considered a "survivors insurance benefit" and thus subject to a weekly offset of $38.23. The Workers' Compensation Board interpreted the statute to limit the offset to "widow's insurance benefits" and not "mother's insurance benefits," arguing that the latter primarily benefits the children. The court affirmed the board's decision, distinguishing mother's benefits from survivor's benefits due to their purpose of supporting children and their cessation when children reach maturity or leave care.

Workers' CompensationSocial Security ActMother's Insurance BenefitsSurvivors Insurance BenefitsOffset ProvisionsDeath BenefitsStatutory InterpretationWidow's BenefitsDependent ChildrenAdministrative Agency Interpretation
References
2
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 29391
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 12, 2019

People v. DeRaffele (John)

John DeRaffele appealed five judgments of conviction for violating sections of the Code of the City of New Rochelle related to the nonconforming use of his home and unpermitted alterations. The Appellate Term reversed convictions under Code § 111-8 (docket Nos. 70063 and 70065) due to insufficient evidence regarding the timing of alterations (bathroom/kitchen) and the deck construction, dismissing those informations. Additionally, two convictions under Code § 331-11 (A) (docket Nos. 70064 and 70097) were reversed and dismissed in the interest of justice because they were multiplicitous to a third charge under the same section. The judgment convicting DeRaffele under City Court docket No. 70098 for nonconforming use was affirmed but the maximum fine of $2,500 was reduced to $500 as a matter of discretion.

MultiplicityDuplicityZoning OrdinancesNonconforming UseBuilding PermitsAppellate ReviewWeight of EvidenceLegal SufficiencyFinesRecusal
References
24
Showing 1-2 of 2 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