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. 2014-2010 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 22, 2017

Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v. 21st Century Ins. Co.

The case *Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v 21st Century Ins. Co.*, decided on September 22, 2017, by the Appellate Term, Second Department, involved an appeal concerning first-party no-fault benefits. The plaintiff-appellant, Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C., challenged an order from the Civil Court that denied its motion for summary judgment and granted the defendant-respondent's cross-motion for summary judgment and to compel disclosure. The Appellate Term affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment regarding claim denials. The court also affirmed that insurers may use the workers' compensation fee schedule for acupuncture services by chiropractors to determine payments for licensed acupuncturists and upheld the defendant's right to discovery due to the plaintiff's untimely objections.

no-fault insurancesummary judgmentacupuncture servicesCPT codesworkers' compensation fee schedulediscovery disputeappellate reviewmedical billinginsurance claimstimely denial
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Charles BB.

Charles BB. was adjudicated a neglected child and placed with a petitioner in a residential facility. The petitioner sought an extension of placement for up to one year, citing the parents' incarceration and the child's continued need for structured care due to disruptive behavior. Family Court granted the extension, prompting an appeal by the infant's Law Guardian. The appellate court rejected arguments for dismissal based on mootness and a premature notice of appeal, choosing to address the merits. It found Family Court's decision to be supported by evidence, including a clinical update detailing two serious negative incidents involving the infant. The court affirmed the order, concluding that the infant's continued placement was warranted and that less restrictive alternatives were not erroneously overlooked.

Child NeglectExtension of PlacementFamily Court Act Article 10Appellate ReviewMootness DoctrineProcedural DefectPremature Notice of AppealResidential PlacementLaw GuardianInfant's Welfare
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 1989

In re the Guardianship of Charles Frederick Eugene M.

This case concerns an appeal by a petitioner agency from a Family Court order dismissing a petition to terminate a mother's parental rights due to permanent neglect. The mother was incarcerated for sexually abusing her child, Charles M., and the agency maintained contact and assisted her in planning for the child's future during her incarceration. The Family Court had found that the mother's plan for the child's return after her release was not unrealistic, but the appellate court found that the agency made diligent efforts and the mother failed to plan realistically for over a year. The appellate court emphasized that incarceration does not excuse a parent's responsibility to plan for their child's future, and the mother had failed to address her underlying issues. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the Family Court's decision, granted the petition for termination of parental rights, and remanded the matter for a dispositional hearing.

Parental RightsPermanent NeglectIncarcerated ParentDiligent EffortsPlanning for ChildSexual AbuseSodomyChild EndangermentFamily LawChild Welfare
References
6
Case No. 2016-790 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 25, 2017

751 Union St., LLC v. Charles

This case concerns an appeal by 751 Union Street, LLC, the landlord, against Linda Charles, the tenant, in a holdover summary proceeding. The landlord alleged the tenant engaged in nuisance behavior, including verbal and physical assaults on building staff and the owner's family, and disturbing a neighbor by banging on the ceiling. The Civil Court initially granted the tenant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the petition entirely. The Appellate Term reversed this decision in part, ruling that while the allegation of disturbing a neighbor required a notice to cure per the lease, the other nine allegations concerning landlord and his employees did not. Consequently, the court granted partial summary judgment only for the ceiling-banging allegation, allowing the remaining claims to proceed.

holdover proceedingnuisancesummary judgmentnotice to cureRent Stabilization Codelease agreementlandlord-tenant disputeverbal abusephysical assaultappellate review
References
4
Case No. CV-23-2137
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Charles Davenport

This case involves an appeal from decisions of the Workers' Compensation Board concerning the timely filing of a claim. Claimant Charles Davenport, who had prior workers' compensation claims, sustained a low back injury in February 2020 while shoveling snow for his employer, Oxford Central School District. A physician's assistant (PA) filed a medical report detailing the injury and attributing it to the snow shoveling incident, which was filed in connection with an earlier 2008 claim. The employer contested the claim, arguing it was untimely under Workers' Compensation Law § 28 due to the claimant's failure to file a C-3 form. The Board found that the PA's medical report constituted a timely filing, providing sufficient notice of a claim. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, reiterating that a C-3 form is not the sole means of timely filing and that other documents, such as medical reports, can satisfy the notice requirement if they convey an intent to claim compensation, a determination supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationTimely FilingMedical ReportPhysician's AssistantExacerbationSnow Shoveling InjuryLumbar Degenerative Disc DiseaseC-3 formNotice of ClaimSubstantial Evidence
References
10
Case No. 534674
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 2023

In the Matter of the Claim of Charles Williams

Claimant Charles Williams, a train conductor, sought workers' compensation benefits for posttraumatic stress disorder following a fatal incident. The employer, New York City Transit Authority, initially filed a report indicating liability but later controverted the claim, arguing untimeliness. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled that the notice of controversy was timely, stating that the relevant statutory period was inapplicable because the claim had never been indexed. On appeal, the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, reversed the Board's decision. The Court found that the Board failed to address the claimant's argument regarding the binding nature of the employer's initial report and did not provide adequate reasoning for its timeliness determination, thus precluding meaningful appellate review. The matter was remitted to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the Court's decision.

Workers' CompensationPosttraumatic Stress DisorderNotice of ControversyTimeliness DisputeAdministrative AppealBoard Decision ReversalRemittalEmployer LiabilityStatutory Interpretation
References
3
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 51149(U)
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 08, 2017

Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v. ELRAC, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal regarding first-party no-fault benefits. The plaintiff, Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C., sought to recover for acupuncture services provided to Sarae Gomez, which were billed under CPT codes 97810 and 97811. The defendant, ELRAC, Inc., had reduced the payments based on the workers' compensation fee schedule applicable to acupuncture services performed by chiropractors. The Appellate Term affirmed the Civil Court's decision, holding that an insurer is permitted to use the workers' compensation fee schedule for chiropractic acupuncture services to determine the reimbursement amount for licensed acupuncturists, thereby upholding the dismissal of the plaintiff's claim for the disputed services.

No-fault benefitsAcupuncture servicesCPT codes 97810CPT codes 97811Workers' compensation fee scheduleSummary judgmentAppellate reviewFee reductionLicensed acupuncturistChiropractic services
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

CHARLES F. EVANS CO., INC. v. Zurich Ins. Co.

Plaintiff Charles F. Evans Company, an insured, sought a declaration that defendant Zurich Insurance Company must defend it in an underlying action. This underlying action involved Damon G. Douglas Company, a general contractor, who subcontracted roofing work to Evans for a BASF Corporation building. BASF counterclaimed against Douglas for improperly installed and leaking roofing, leading Douglas to bring a third-party action against Evans for indemnity and contribution. BASF's counterclaim alleged bodily injuries to its employees due to slip-and-falls from the leaking roof, resulting in lost-time and workers' compensation claims. The court found that the insurance policy, covering damages for 'bodily injury,' was at least ambiguous regarding these claims and thus must be construed against the insurer, triggering Zurich's duty to defend Evans. The court also rejected Zurich's argument that the slip-and-falls were not 'occurrences' (accidents) under the policy.

Duty to DefendInsurance CoverageBodily InjurySlip and FallConstruction ContractRoofing DefectWorkers' Compensation ClaimsPolicy AmbiguityThird-Party ActionIndemnity
References
3
Case No. 2014-512 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 15, 2016

Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v. Farmington Cas. Co.

This case involves an appeal by Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C., as the assignee of Nina Amin, against Farmington Casualty Company. The appeal challenged an order from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, which had granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, thereby dismissing the complaint. The plaintiff was seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The Appellate Term concluded that the defendant successfully demonstrated that the denial of claim forms were mailed in a timely manner and that the plaintiff had received full payment for the services at issue, in accordance with the workers' compensation fee schedule. Consequently, the Appellate Term affirmed the lower court's order.

No-Fault BenefitsSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Fee ScheduleDenial of ClaimTimely MailingFirst-Party BenefitsAssignee RightsCivil Court AppealInsurance Dispute
References
1
Case No. 2013-2745 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 27, 2016

Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co.

This case involves an appeal by Charles Deng Acupuncture, P.C., as assignee of Joseph Moniel, against Allstate Insurance Company, regarding assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The Appellate Term, Second Department, reviewed an order from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County. The Civil Court had denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, partially granted the defendant's cross-motion, and found that the defendant's denial of claim forms were timely mailed. The Appellate Term modified the order by denying the branch of the defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment and vacating the finding on timely mailing, citing insufficient evidence from the defendant. However, the court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's summary judgment motion, as the plaintiff also failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to judgment.

No-fault benefitsSummary judgmentDenial of claimTimely mailingStandard office practicePrima facieAppellate reviewCivil CourtInsurance law
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 259 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