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

Director of the Assigned Counsel Plan v. Townsend

This case involves an appeal by the Director of the Assigned Counsel Plan from orders of the Supreme Court, New York County. The Director's applications sought to reduce vouchers for compensation for services other than counsel in multiple criminal cases. The Supreme Court denied these applications and, upon reconsideration, adhered to its decisions directing the processing of the vouchers. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed these orders, finding no basis to disturb the lower court's determinations of "reasonable compensation" and "extraordinary circumstances" under County Law § 722-c. The court further ruled that such determinations are not reviewable by the Appellate Division, emphasizing that fiscal concerns regarding compensation should be addressed through administrative review processes.

Assigned Counsel PlanVoucher CompensationCriminal Defense ServicesAttorney CompensationSocial Worker CompensationCounty Law 722-cExtraordinary CircumstancesAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionAdministrative Review
References
4
Case No. ADJ8596014
Regular
Nov 07, 2018

DION GEORGE vs. KJI PLUMBING, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a $\$ 750$ sanction imposed by a WCJ against defense counsel and KJI Plumbing for defense counsel's failure to appear at a hearing. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the failure to appear was due to defense counsel's negligence, not willful misconduct. Consequently, the Board reduced the sanction to $\$ 250$ and removed KJI Plumbing as a liable party, solely sanctioning defense counsel and his law office. The Board cautioned that future failures to appear could establish a pattern justifying larger sanctions.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsWCJDefense CounselJointly and SeverallyUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of ReadinessLabor Code § 5813WCAB Rule 10561
References
0
Case No. 5615/89; 2643/91
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Director of the Assigned Counsel Plan

The court denies the Director of the Assigned Counsel Plan of the City of New York's request for further reconsideration of 'reasonable compensation' awarded to expert witness Hillel Bodek in People v Toe and People v Hoe. Judge Goodman reaffirmed the original compensation, emphasizing that judicial determinations of expert fees under County Law § 722-c are not subject to administrative review by the Director. The court rejected arguments regarding excessive compensation, lack of specificity in orders, and the expert's qualifications, highlighting the confidentiality of reports and the judge's sole authority in such matters. The opinion clarified the roles of judges and administrators in the assigned counsel plan. The Director was ordered, under penalty of contempt, to process the payment of $5,200 and $200 for Bodek's services.

Expert Witness CompensationCounty Law § 722-cJudicial DiscretionAdministrative ReviewForensic Social WorkMental Health EvaluationConfidentiality of ReportsProfessional QualificationsExtraordinary CircumstancesContempt Order
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Grace PP.

This case involves an appeal from a County Court order in Saratoga County. The order directed respondent, as attorney-in-fact for Grace PP. (an alleged incapacitated person, AIP), to pay counsel fees to the AIP's assigned counsel and to the petitioner's counsel. The petitioner, a licensed social worker, initiated a Mental Hygiene Law article 81 proceeding to appoint a guardian for Grace PP., who suffered from dementia and required nursing home placement. County Court appointed a temporary guardian and ordered the respondent to pay counsel fees. The respondent appealed, arguing the AIP was indigent due to Medicaid benefits. The appellate court found no error or abuse of discretion in the County Court's award of counsel fees and affirmed the order, noting the record lacked evidence of the AIP's indigence despite her Medicaid recipient status.

Counsel FeesIndigenceMedicaid BenefitsAttorney-in-factGuardian AppointmentIncapacitated PersonDementiaNursing Home PlacementAppellate ReviewSaratoga County
References
3
Case No. ADJ3118083
Regular
Jun 14, 2010

MARCELO SANDOVAL vs. TRITON CHANDELIER, INC., SPECIALTY RISK LA HABRA

The applicant seeks reconsideration of a case dismissed for failure to appear at a mandatory settlement conference. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the petition timely filed. However, the Board issued a notice of intention to impose sanctions on applicant's counsel for failing to appear at the conference and failing to notify the Board. Applicant's counsel must show good cause within 15 days to avoid a $250.00 sanction for causing unnecessary delay.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationMandatory Settlement ConferenceNotice of Intention to DismissLabor Code § 5813sanctionsgood causeuntimely filingunverified petitionEAMS
References
2
Case No. ADJ8755824
Regular
Oct 27, 2014

ARVIN DORILLO vs. BARLOW RESPIRATORY HOSPITAL, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Arvin Dorillo, whose workers' compensation claim was dismissed by the WCJ for failing to appear at two hearings. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the dismissal. They reasoned that the applicant was not in violation of dismissal rules as he was represented by counsel at the hearings. The Board emphasized the policy of disposing of cases on their merits and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings. The applicant was cautioned that he must appear in person at future hearings unless he obtains new counsel.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseNotice of Intention to DismissMandatory Settlement ConferenceRelief as CounselSubstantial JusticeDisposition on MeritsRepresented by AttorneyFailure to AppearRescind Order
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Fernandez v. Royal Coach Lines, Inc.

Claimant's counsel appealed a decision by the Workers’ Compensation Board that reduced their previously awarded counsel fees from $2,800 to $450. The Board found the counsel's fee application, form OC-400.1, deficient as it failed to provide specific dates and time spent for each service, as mandated by 12 NYCRR 300.17 (d) and Board bulletin Subject Number 046-548. Additionally, counsel failed to disclose a prior $900 fee award. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the Board did not abuse its discretion in reducing the fees due to the non-compliant application. The court also clarified that prior holdings suggesting no requirement for time spent on services, such as in *Matter of Pavone*, should no longer be followed.

Counsel Fee ReductionWorkers' Compensation Board AppealFee Application Deficiencies12 NYCRR 300.17Appellate DivisionAdministrative DiscretionPermanent Partial DisabilityWage-Earning CapacityPrior Fee DisclosureMatter of Pavone Overruled
References
3
Case No. ADJ1229402 (AHM 0030668)
Regular
Jan 28, 2010

PHILLIP JOHNSON vs. REBAR ENGINEERING, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES GROUP, FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted CIGA's petition for removal, rescinding an order for their claims examiner, Christine Harris, to appear at a conference. The Board found that since CIGA now has legal counsel and testimony would not be taken, Harris' personal appearance was unnecessary and would cause undue hardship. They reasoned that Harris could provide necessary information to counsel and be available by phone, deferring her mandatory attendance to a potential future trial. A dissenting opinion argued that CIGA failed to demonstrate sufficient prejudice for removal.

CIGAPetition for RemovalOrder To AppearWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJClaims ExaminerIndustrial InjuryCompromise and ReleaseStipulations with Request for AwardMedical Bills
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Banton v. New York City Department of Corrections

Claimant's counsel filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits after the claimant was injured. Counsel sought a change of venue, citing a purported "Board Rule 10.01 (1) (c)" which the Workers’ Compensation Board found to be non-existent. The Workers’ Compensation Law Judge denied the request and assessed penalties against counsel under Workers’ Compensation Law § 114-a (3) (i) and (ii). On administrative appeal, the Board rescinded the penalty under § 114-a (3) (i) but increased the penalty under § 114-a (3) (ii) due to the appeal lacking reasonable basis. The court affirmed the Board's decision, noting that counsel had been previously warned about citing the inaccurate "Board Rule" and that clarification on venue application rules was available before the administrative appeal was filed.

Attorney MisconductVenue ChangeMonetary PenaltyWorkers' Compensation BoardAdministrative AppealSubstantial EvidenceLegal TreatiseProcedural MotionUnreasonable GroundsAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. ADJ8164012
Regular
Jul 01, 2013

HOSSEIN MOGHADAM vs. TESORO USA PETROLEUM, COMMERCE & INDUSTRY INSURANCE

This case concerns a $\$ 250$ sanction imposed on applicant's attorney for failing to appear at a hearing. The applicant's attorney sought reconsideration, arguing a misunderstanding of "special appearance." The Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's reasoning and clarifying that a "special appearance" does not excuse an attorney from a hearing, especially when made by opposing counsel. The Board emphasized that only a WCJ can excuse an appearance or grant a continuance, and cautioned the attorney against future rule violations.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Imposing SanctionsFailure to AppearSpecial AppearanceWCJApplicant's AttorneyFiduciary DutiesConflict of InterestContinuanceAppeals Board Rule 10843
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 2,177 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