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 Valenti v. Penn Plax Plastics

The claimant, exposed to asbestos between 1965 and 1972, developed asbestosis, asbestos-related pleural disease, and lung cancer. His 1995 workers' compensation claim was denied by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board, which found his lung cancer causally related to asbestos exposure occurring before July 1, 1974, thus falling under the 'dust disease' rule requiring total disability for compensation. The claimant appealed, arguing lung cancer is not a dust disease. The appellate court reversed and remitted the decision, clarifying that while lung cancer itself is not a dust disease, the pre-1974 restriction applies if it's causally related to a dust disease like asbestosis. The court noted the Board failed to make a specific finding on this causal link.

asbestos exposurelung cancerasbestosisworkers' compensationdust diseasetotal disabilitypartial disabilitycausationremittalappellate review
References
9
Case No. ADJ14015513
Regular
Feb 15, 2023

BRADEN NANEZ vs. 3 STONEDEGGS, INC., TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE COMPANY, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board rescinded the initial Findings and Order, finding the applicant's petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service. The Board applied the commercial traveler rule, determining the applicant's injury arose out of and in the course of employment. The claim is not barred by the going and coming rule or intoxication, and the applicant sustained a fractured right femur. Issues of traumatic brain injury and bruised lung are deferred for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationOpinion and DecisionFindings and OrderApplicantEmployerAdjustedAdjudication NumberRedding District OfficeInjury Arising Out of and In the Course of Employment (AOE/COE)
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 10, 2011

Claim of Gillard v. Consolidated Edison of New York, Inc.

The employer and its third-party administrator appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying their claim for reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund for death benefits paid to a claimant. The claimant's husband, who had a workers' compensation claim established for permanent partial disability due to asbestos-related pleural disease, later died from lung cancer and congestive heart failure. The employer sought reimbursement, arguing a link between asbestosis and lung cancer, but the Board denied this, stating the original claim was not established for asbestosis and that the request to reopen was untimely. The Board further found no proof connecting asbestosis to the lung cancer. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, agreeing that the reopening request was untimely and that there was no causal link shown between asbestosis and the lung cancer.

Workers' CompensationSpecial Disability FundReimbursementAsbestosisLung CancerCausal RelationshipTimelinessDeath BenefitsAppellate ReviewBoard Decision
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Parrelli v. Atlantic Construction

The claimant, who previously suffered a hand injury and received a lump-sum settlement, filed a second workers' compensation claim in 2000 for asbestos-related lung disease. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded lost wages, but the Workers’ Compensation Board eliminated this award, ruling no causal relationship between the lung disease and loss of earnings, as the claimant retired due to other ailments. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, noting the claimant's failure to seek suitable work within medical limitations despite doctors' warnings about asbestos exposure, and the lack of evidence that the lung disease affected his earning capacity.

Asbestos ExposurePleural DiseaseCausal RelationshipLoss of EarningsPermanent Partial DisabilityDisability RetirementMedical LimitationsEarning CapacityAppellate ReviewVocational Rehabilitation
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Garrio v. Donovan

A porter-cleaner, disabled since 1989 due to lung cancer, appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision which concluded his disabling lung condition was not work-related. Claimant’s treating physician opined that his conditions, including asbestosis, chronic bronchitis, and COPD, were causally related to occupational exposure to asbestos, coal dust, and soot. However, the employer’s expert and an impartial specialist concluded that the lung cancer and emphysema were caused by heavy cigarette smoking. The Board's decision, supported by the impartial specialist's and carrier's expert's opinions, was affirmed, finding sufficient medical evidence to resolve the conflict in opinions regarding causality.

Lung CancerAsbestosisChronic BronchitisCOPDCausationMedical Opinion ConflictExpert TestimonyWorkers' Compensation AppealOccupational ExposureCigarette Smoking
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Surianello v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

The claimant, an electrical construction mechanic, developed lung disease after working at the World Trade Center (WTC) site. He filed workers' compensation claims, and was eventually found permanently totally disabled. The self-insured employer sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund, arguing a preexisting lung condition contributed to the disability. The Workers’ Compensation Board denied reimbursement, concluding the disability was solely caused by WTC site exposure. However, the appellate court reversed, citing medical evidence from pulmonologists Carl Friedman and Neil Schacter, which indicated the claimant's overall disability was materially and substantially greater due to a preexisting restrictive lung disease, not just WTC exposure. The case was remitted to the Board for further proceedings.

WTC Site ExposureOccupational Lung DiseaseSpecial Disability FundReimbursement ClaimPreexisting Medical ConditionPermanent Total DisabilityCausationMedical Expert OpinionAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Board
References
7
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 04609
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2022

Dyer v. Amchem Prods. Inc.

In this asbestos exposure litigation, defendant American Biltrite, Inc. (ABI) sought summary judgment on the issue of causation. The plaintiff's decedent, Kenneth C. Dyer, died from lung cancer and claimed exposure to asbestos from ABI's vinyl floor tiles. The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's order denying ABI's motion for summary judgment. The court found that ABI successfully made a prima facie case that the decedent was not exposed to sufficient quantities of respirable asbestos from its product to cause his lung cancer. The plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact regarding specific causation, as the expert's conclusions lacked a reliable correlation between exposure levels and the causation of lung cancer, thereby failing to satisfy the standards set by Parker and Nemeth.

Asbestos exposureLung cancerSummary judgmentCausationToxic tortExpert testimonySimulation studiesRespirable asbestosVinyl floor tilesOccupational exposure
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 01, 1978

Boney v. Gouverneur Talc Co.

The appellants, an employer and its insurance carrier, appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision, contending that the record lacked sufficient evidence to establish a definitive causal link between the decedent’s lung cancer (carcinomatosis) and his harmful mineral exposure, which admittedly caused pneumoconiosis. The Board had found, based on Mr. Kitts' testimony, that talcosis samples contained 2%-60% asbestos and, supported by Dr. Miller's testimony, that pneumoconiosis predisposes to lung cancer, and Dr. Maxon's testimony, that a definite relationship exists between asbestosis and lung cancer. Consequently, the Board concluded that the decedent's death from occupational talcosis was causally related to his compensable condition. The appellate court found that the record contained substantial evidence supporting the award of death benefits and therefore affirmed the Board's decision, with costs awarded against the employer and its insurance carrier.

Lung CancerPneumoconiosisAsbestosisOccupational DiseaseDeath BenefitsCausal RelationshipMedical TestimonyWorkers' Compensation AppealMineral ExposureTalcosis
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2001

Claim of Caiazza v. Eastman Kodak Co.

The claimant, a former machinist, developed skin cancer in 1990 and later lung and brain cancers in 2000, attributed to occupational exposure. Following his retirement in 2001, the employer conceded the lung and brain cancers were consequential to the initial skin cancer. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found the claimant permanently totally disabled and awarded weekly benefits of $300, based on the original skin cancer disablement date of February 27, 1986. The claimant sought Workers' Compensation Board review, arguing for an April 24, 2000 disablement date (diagnosis of lung/brain cancers) to receive higher benefits of $400/week. The Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision, citing the claimant's prior stipulation to modify the original claim for consequential injuries and established law that such awards are measured by rates at the time of the original injury. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding it was not unreasonable to rely on the claimant's agreement and that the award rate was supported by substantial evidence.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation BenefitsDate of DisablementBenefit Rate CalculationConsequential InjurySkin CancerLung CancerBrain CancerPermanent Total DisabilityAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 15, 2013

In re Kesan W.

The Family Court in Bronx County affirmed its prior fact-finding determination that the respondent mother neglected her son, Kesan W., by inflicting excessive corporal punishment. The court found that the son's out-of-court statements, detailing a history of being hit with a belt and sustaining bruises, were properly admitted as evidence. These statements were corroborated by observations from an ACS caseworker, a Legal Aid Society social worker, and his guidance counselor, all of whom noted bruises on the son's arm.

Child NeglectCorporal PunishmentFamily CourtChild AbuseEvidence AdmissibilityOut-of-court StatementsCorroborationParental NeglectAppellate Review
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 125 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