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

F.O. ex rel. O. v. New York City Department of Education

Plaintiffs F.O. and E.O., on behalf of their minor child Brendan O., sued the New York City Department of Education under the IDEA and New York State Education Law. They sought to reverse a State Review Officer (SRO) decision that had overturned an Impartial Hearing Officer (IHO) decision, which ordered the DOE to reimburse tuition for Brendan's private school placement at the Rebecca School for the 2010-2011 school year. Brendan, diagnosed with Myasthenia Gravis and Autism, required special education services, and the dispute centered on the adequacy of the DOE's proposed IEP (a 12:1:4 classroom) versus the Rebecca School's program. The District Court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment regarding tuition reimbursement, finding the SRO's decision inadequately reasoned and deferring to the IHO's conclusion that the DOE's IEP was inappropriate and the Rebecca School was an appropriate unilateral placement. The court ordered the DOE to reimburse $92,100 for Brendan's tuition but denied the plaintiffs' request for declaratory relief concerning a 1:1 health paraprofessional on procedural grounds.

Individuals with Disabilities Education ActSpecial EducationFree Appropriate Public EducationIndividualized Educational ProgramTuition ReimbursementAutism Spectrum DisorderMyasthenia GravisImpartial Hearing OfficerState Review OfficerUnilateral Private Placement
References
41
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 06370 [222 AD3d 756]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 13, 2023

Matter of William O. (Duff)

August O., Jr., as guardian of William O. and administrator of his estate, moved to settle his final account, which included confirming a referee's report. The report concerned claims against and by Claudette Duff, William O.'s geriatric care manager. The Supreme Court, Richmond County, confirmed the referee's findings that Duff improperly collected $9,750 in rent and denied her claim for alleged unpaid expenses. Duff appealed this order. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the court providently exercised its discretion in directing Duff to reimburse the estate and denying her claim.

GuardianshipMental Hygiene LawFiduciary DutyRent CollectionEstate AdministrationAppellate ReviewFinal AccountReferee's ReportUnpaid ExpensesGeriatric Care Manager
References
2
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00603 [135 AD3d 660]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2016

Matter of Nataysha O. (Manuel O.)

The Family Court, Bronx County, initially dismissed petitions alleging neglect against respondent Manuel O. for inflicting excessive corporal punishment on one child and derivatively neglecting two others. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously reversed this decision. The court found, based on a preponderance of evidence including the child's statements and a photograph, that respondent intentionally burned his nearly four-year-old daughter with a cigarette. The respondent's testimony of an accidental injury was rejected as improbable. Consequently, the Appellate Division entered findings of neglect and derivative neglect against the respondent and remanded the case to the Family Court for a dispositional hearing.

NeglectCorporal PunishmentChild AbuseFamily LawAppellate ProcedureEvidenceCredibilityDerivative NeglectIntentional InjuryCigarette Burn
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 1994

Wilbur O. v. Christina P.

This case involves appeals from Family Court orders granting Wilbur O. sole legal custody of his children, William and Jessica O., and adjudicating them as neglected by their mother, Christina P., and stepfather, Allan P. Following their divorce, Christina P. and Allan P., active Jehovah\'s Witnesses, raised the children and began discarding items from Wilbur\'s visits, believing them to be demon-possessed. Christina P. was diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder and experienced flashbacks of alleged satanic ritualistic abuse, eventually implicating Wilbur. The parents unilaterally terminated Wilbur\'s visitation, leading to the children\'s severe depression. The children, influenced by their parents, began recounting detailed, uncorroborated "memories" of satanic abuse by Wilbur. After intervention by the Department of Social Services (DSS), the children recanted their allegations, attributing them to suggestions from Christina P. and Allan P. A court-ordered psychological report diagnosed Christina P. with a possible psychotic disorder and described a "Folie á Deux" shared delusion with the children. The appeals court affirmed the Family Court\'s findings of neglect and the change of custody to Wilbur O., concluding that the children\'s mental and emotional health was impaired by Christina P. and Allan P.\'s conduct.

Child Custody DisputeChild NeglectParental AlienationFalse Allegations of AbuseSatanic Ritual Abuse AllegationsPosttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)Shared Delusion (Folie á Deux)Family Court ActAppellate DecisionPsychological Evaluation
References
3
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 03554
Regular Panel Decision
May 07, 2019

Matter of Zavion O. (Donna O.)

This consolidated appeal addresses the legality of protective arrest warrants issued by Family Court for two infants, Zavion O. and Serenity R.L., who are chronic absconders from foster care. The infants exhibit significant behavioral and mental health challenges, leading Family Court to issue warrants under Family Court Act § 153 to ensure their health and safety. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed these orders, holding that FCA § 153 does not authorize protective arrests for non-respondent children who are not required as witnesses in a proceeding. The court emphasized Family Court's limited jurisdiction, stating that the 'parens patriae' doctrine cannot create statutory authority. While acknowledging the compelling need for effective tools to manage serial absconders, the court concluded that any such authorization must originate from the legislature.

Child WelfareFamily Court JurisdictionArrest Warrant LegalityProtective CustodyAbsconding ChildrenStatutory InterpretationParens Patriae DoctrineAppellate ReviewFoster CareJuvenile Delinquency
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 23, 2015

Matter of Ruth Joanna O.O. (Melissa O.)

Justice Gesmer dissents from the affirmation of a Family Court order finding Melissa O. neglected her child. The dissent argues that the Family Court lacked a basis for its neglect finding, as there was no evidence that the mother's conduct impaired or threatened her child's condition. Furthermore, it asserts that the findings regarding the mother's failure to take medication or engage in mental health services were unsupported by admissible evidence. Gesmer, J. emphasizes that proof of mental illness alone is insufficient for a neglect finding without a causal link to actual or potential harm to the child. The dissent concludes that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the mother's mental illness resulted in a failure to provide a minimum degree of care or that the child was harmed or at imminent risk of harm.

Child Protective ProceedingNeglect FindingParental Mental IllnessSufficiency of EvidenceImminent Risk of HarmMinimum Degree of CareFamily Court ActDissenting OpinionAdmissibility of EvidenceCausal Connection
References
15
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 08059
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 30, 2016

Raja v. Big Geyser, Inc.

Yasir Raja sued Big Geyser, Inc., for personal injuries after being struck by a truck operated by Andre Cruz, an employee of Dynasty Distributors, Inc. Raja alleged that Cruz was an employee of Big Geyser, despite Cruz working for Dynasty, which had a distributor agreement with Big Geyser. Big Geyser moved for summary judgment, arguing Cruz was an independent contractor's employee and not directly employed by them. The Supreme Court granted Big Geyser's motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed, concluding that Big Geyser's incidental control over Dynasty's distribution was insufficient to establish an employer-employee relationship with Cruz, thus dismissing the complaint against Big Geyser.

Personal InjuryEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent ContractorSummary JudgmentVicarious LiabilityAppellate ReviewVehicle AccidentControl TestDistributor Agreement
References
7
Case No. 11-09-00337-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 20, 2011

In Re DO

This case involves the appeal of M.O.W. and C.D.O. from a trial court's order terminating their parental rights to their three children: D.O., S.O., and M.L.O. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (The Department) initiated the termination suit after M.O.W. was arrested for methamphetamine possession and the children were removed from her care. A jury found by clear and convincing evidence that termination was in the children's best interest and that M.O.W. and C.D.O. had endangered their children's well-being and failed to comply with court orders. The Court of Appeals of Texas, Eastland, affirmed the trial court's decision, finding legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings regarding parental conduct endangering the children's physical and emotional well-being, extensive drug abuse, and related criminal activities. The court also addressed and overruled M.O.W.'s evidentiary and jury charge issues.

Parental Rights TerminationChild EndangermentDrug AbuseMethamphetamine PossessionFoster Care PlacementSufficiency of EvidenceBest Interest of ChildFamily Law AppealAbuse of DiscretionJury Instruction
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 09, 1946

In re the Arbitration between Transport Workers Union of America, C.I.O., & Fifth Avenue Coach Co.

The Transport Workers Union of America, O.I.O., applied to vacate an arbitration award made in a dispute with the Fifth Avenue Coach Company. The core of the dispute revolved around the implementation of one-man operation of double-deck buses and related employment terms. The Union contended that the arbitrator failed to render a decision on the primary question regarding the implementation of one-man operation, despite it being a key item in the submission agreement. The court found that the arbitrator explicitly avoided deciding this issue, thus failing to fulfill the terms of the submission. Consequently, the court ruled that the award was not mutual, final, and definite on all matters submitted for arbitration, rendering it invalid. The application to vacate the award was therefore granted, with an order for resubmission.

ArbitrationAward VacatedLabor DisputeCollective BargainingOne-Man OperationDouble-Deck BusesArbitrator AuthorityScope of SubmissionUnionPublic Transport
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

in the Interest of D.O., S.O., and M.L.O., Children

M.O.W. and C.D.O. appealed the trial court's order terminating their parental rights to their three children, D.O., S.O., and M.L.O. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services initiated the termination due to the parents' extensive methamphetamine use, related criminal activities, and neglect, which endangered the children's physical and emotional well-being. The jury found by clear and convincing evidence that parental rights should be terminated and that this was in the best interest of the children, appointing the Department as permanent managing conservator. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the termination of parental rights and the appointment of the Department as managing conservator. The court also addressed and overruled the appellants' evidentiary and jury instruction challenges.

Parental RightsTerminationMethamphetamine AbuseChild EndangermentBest Interest of ChildFoster CareAppellate ReviewTexas Family LawDrug-Related CrimeChild Welfare
References
31
Showing 1-10 of 894 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