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. ADJ1484892 (SBR 0318885)
Regular
May 04, 2015

JOANNE CORSON vs. BEVERLY MANOR SANITARIUM, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE EXCESS CARRIER

In *Corson v. Beverly Manor Sanitarium*, the applicant sought reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB granted reconsideration to allow further study of the factual and legal issues involved. This is a preliminary step to ensure a just and reasoned decision after a thorough review. All future correspondence related to the reconsideration petition must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationBeverly Manor SanitariumPermissibly Self-InsuredAmerican Home Assurance Excess CarrierAIG ClaimsStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issuesJust and reasoned decisionOffice of the Commissioners
References
1
Case No. 0718 2903
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 1979

Claim of Forte v. Larchment Manor Park Society

Rocco Forte, a fuel oil truck driver, suffered a myocardial infarction in 1971 while at work. He later experienced a second infarction in 1972 while lifting an air conditioner at home, which the board found causally related to the 1971 accident. In 1975, while working as a security guard, he sustained a leg injury and chest pain after a fall, leading to another myocardial infarction. He died in 1976 after cardiac arrest following a coronary angiogram, with his death found causally related to the 1971 accident and other incidents. The Workers’ Compensation Board apportioned disability payments and found causal relationships. Employers Gunn Brothers & Rye Fuel Company, Argonaut Insurance Company, Larchment Manor Park Society, and Federal Insurance Co. appealed these findings, but the Board's decision was affirmed based on conflicting medical opinions.

Myocardial InfarctionCausationApportionmentWorkers' Compensation AppealMedical Testimony ConflictSubstantial EvidenceOccupational HazardCardiac ArrestConsequential InjuryMultiple Injuries
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Williamsbridge Manor Nursing Home v. Local 144 Division of 1199, National Health & Human Services Employers Union

Plaintiff Williamsbridge Manor Nursing Home sought to permanently enjoin an arbitration hearing related to the suspension of its employee, Cynthia Sullivan. The defendant, New York’s Health & Human Services Employers Union 1199/SEIU, AFL-CIO, opposed this motion and cross-moved for summary judgment and/or dismissal. The core issue revolved around whether an obligation to arbitrate survived the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) in October 1997, given that the incident leading to Sullivan's suspension occurred in December 1998. The court determined that the dispute did not arise under the expired CBA, nor was there an implied-in-fact agreement to arbitrate post-expiration disputes, as the plaintiff's conduct was inconsistent with implied consent. Furthermore, the court ruled that the plaintiff's petition was not moot, despite the arbitration having already taken place, because the court retains power to act until an arbitration award is confirmed. Consequently, the plaintiff's motion to permanently enjoin the arbitration was granted, and the defendant’s motion to dismiss for mootness was denied.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementCBA ExpirationImplied-in-fact ContractFederal Arbitration ActLabor Management Relations ActPermanent InjunctionMootnessEmployee SuspensionJudicial Determination
References
25
Case No. ADJ3554201 (VNO 0429945) ADJ2060228 (PAS 0034618)
Regular
May 30, 2014

ROSEMARY MOSER vs. BEVERLY HOSPITAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Rosemary Moser's petition for reconsideration in the case against Beverly Hospital. The dismissal was based on the administrative law judge's report, which found the petition to be untimely filed, unverified, and improperly served. Therefore, the Board adopted the judge's recommendation and ordered the petition dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedUntimelyUnverifiedNot Properly ServedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationIncorporated ReportPermit Self-Insured
References
0
Case No. 525358
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 07, 2018

Matter of Busat v. Ramapo Manor Nursing Ctr.

Claimant, a food service worker, suffered work-related injuries to his back, neck, and right shoulder in 1997, receiving workers' compensation benefits. In 2014, claimant resumed treatment for his right shoulder and was found to have a 50% temporary disability. During a vacation, he underwent an unrelated cardiac procedure, which prevented him from receiving medical clearance for planned shoulder surgery due to ongoing heart medication. The Workers' Compensation Board initially ruled that claimant's departure from employment was unrelated to his disability and that he failed to remain attached to the labor market. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found the Board's reasoning contradicted by consistent medical evidence indicating claimant's inability to obtain shoulder surgery clearance due to his cardiac condition. Consequently, the court reversed the Board's decisions and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationDisability BenefitsLabor Market AttachmentMedical ClearanceCardiac ConditionShoulder InjuryBoard ReconsiderationAppellate ReviewMedical EvidenceCausation
References
3
Case No. CA 13-00856
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 2014

PIOTROWSKI, RICHARD v. MCGUIRE MANOR, INC.

Plaintiff Richard Piotrowski sued McGuire Manor, Inc. under Labor Law and common-law negligence after sustaining injuries from a fall off a wobbly ladder. A jury initially found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded damages. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, reversed the judgment and granted a new trial. The court determined that the trial court committed a reversible error by failing to give an expanded sole proximate cause charge to the jury, thereby prejudicing a substantial right of the defendant. Dissenting justices argued that the issue regarding the jury charge was not properly preserved for review or that the charge provided was sufficient.

Labor LawSole Proximate CauseJury ChargeAppellate ReviewNegligenceLadder AccidentReversalNew TrialPreservation of ErrorCPLR
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tuthill v. United States

Plaintiff Beverly Tuthill brought an action against the United States of America under the Federal Tort Claims Act after suffering injuries from a slip and fall on ice at the West Point Visitor's Center parking lot. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing they had no duty to protect the plaintiff from an open and obvious condition and lacked notice of the icy patch. The court denied the defendant's motion, citing genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the ice was indeed open and obvious and whether the defendant had constructive notice due to a potentially recurring ice problem in the area and the reasonableness of their inspection procedures. The case is to proceed to trial.

Federal Tort Claims ActSlip and FallSummary Judgment MotionNegligenceNew York LawOpen and Obvious HazardConstructive NoticeRecurring ProblemPremises LiabilityDuty of Care
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 01, 2012

Anton v. West Manor Construction Corp.

This is an appellate decision regarding an order from Supreme Court, Bronx County, from February 1, 2012. The appeal concerns a reargument of summary judgment motions between West Manor Construction Corp., Bradhurst 100 Development LLC, and third-party defendant Tiegre Mechanical Corp. The appellate court modified the original order, granting Tiegre's motion to dismiss the common-law indemnification and contribution claims, as the injured plaintiff did not sustain a "grave injury" under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. The court affirmed the original determination regarding contractual indemnification claims, finding that the plaintiff's alleged rule violation was not a proximate cause of the accident, which involved a cinder block dropped by an employee of Larino Masonry, Inc.

Summary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationCommon-law IndemnificationContributionWorkers' Compensation LawGrave InjuryProximate CauseAppellate DivisionReargumentThird-Party Claims
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 23, 2012

Bodtman v. Living Manor Love, Inc.

The appellate court reversed an order by the Supreme Court, New York County, which had denied summary judgment to defendants RM Farm Real Estate Inc. and Living Manor Love, Inc. The defendants' motions to dismiss claims under Labor Law §§ 240 and 200, and common-law negligence, were consequently granted. The Labor Law § 240 (1) claim was dismissed because the plaintiff's task of drilling holes for a temporary sign was not considered "altering" the building as defined by the statute. Furthermore, the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims were also dismissed. This was due to the determination that the hazard, the inherently slippery and sloped metal roof, was readily apparent and inherent to the work, precluding defendant liability based on constructive notice.

Summary JudgmentLabor Law 240Labor Law 200NegligenceSafe Place to WorkConstruction SafetyAppellate DivisionDismissal of ClaimsInherent RiskNotice of Hazard
References
7
Case No. ADJ1543782
Regular
Aug 18, 2009

Richard E. Knudsen vs. CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS

In this workers' compensation case, the Board denied the defendant City of Beverly Hills' reconsideration of its prior decision. The Board had overturned a judge's finding that a police officer's shoulder injury sustained while exercising in the station gym during off-duty hours was not industrial. The Board determined the injury was compensable because it was a reasonable expectancy of employment under the specific circumstances. This decision reinforces the finding that the officer's workout was a reasonable part of his employment, even during off-duty hours.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Beverly Hillspolice officerleft shoulder injuryindustrial injuryreasonable expectancyoff-duty hoursgymcompensablereconsideration
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 98 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