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. Docket No. 13
Regular Panel Decision

Rubet v. Commissioner of Social Security

Maria Rubet, claiming disability due to a nervous condition since October 1993, sought judicial review of a decision by the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Following a remand and a subsequent hearing, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) again found Rubet not disabled, a determination adopted by the Commissioner. Rubet failed to respond to the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings and a court order. The Court, after reviewing the record and adopting the Commissioner's analysis, found substantial evidence, including medical evaluations, to support the ALJ's finding that Rubet was not disabled. Consequently, the Court granted the Commissioner's motion to dismiss the complaint.

Social SecuritySSI BenefitsDisability ClaimAdministrative Law JudgeMedical EvaluationResidual Functional CapacityMental ImpairmentAppealsJudicial ReviewCommissioner Decision
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rice v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff Tammy Rice sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying her application for disability benefits. The District Court considered the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that Plaintiff had severe impairments of mild degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine and mild degenerative joint disease of the knees but did not meet or equal a listed impairment. The ALJ determined Plaintiff could perform light work with restrictions, concluding she was not disabled. The Court found the Commissioner's decision supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with applicable legal standards. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, and Plaintiff's complaint was dismissed with prejudice.

Social SecurityDisability BenefitsALJ DecisionSubstantial EvidenceMedical EvidenceResidual Functional CapacityTreating Physician RuleFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureRule 12(c)Lumbar Spine
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Parris v. New York State Department Correctional Services

Antoine Parris, a pro se plaintiff, sued Commissioner Brian Fischer, Superintendent William Lee, and Deputy Superintendent Edward Burnett under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging an Eighth Amendment violation for failure to protect him from a stabbing by another inmate and state law negligence claims. The defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of exhaustion of administrative remedies. The court denied the motion to dismiss on exhaustion grounds due to ambiguity in the complaint. However, the court granted the motion to dismiss the federal claims, finding that Parris failed to allege sufficient facts to establish deliberate indifference by the defendants or their personal involvement in an Eighth Amendment violation. The plaintiff's state law claims were also dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as New York Corrections Law § 24 provides immunity for DOCCS employees.

Prisoner RightsEighth Amendment ViolationDeliberate IndifferenceFailure to ProtectPrison Litigation Reform ActAdministrative ExhaustionSupervisory LiabilitySection 1983Motion to DismissPro Se Litigation
References
39
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Door Specialties, Inc. v. Commissioner of Labor

The petitioner challenged the Commissioner's decision regarding the applicability of Labor Law § 220, which mandates prevailing wages, to small public projects. The petitioner argued that the procedural provisions of the statute suggested an exclusion for such projects. However, the Commissioner properly rejected this argument, a decision affirmed by the court. The court found no unequivocal indication in the statute to exclude small, unbid projects from prevailing wage requirements. It emphasized the overriding purpose of Labor Law § 220 to protect laborers and mechanics, irrespective of project size, and noted that the failure of public agencies to provide wage rate schedules does not absolve contractors of their prevailing wage obligations.

Labor LawPrevailing WagePublic ProjectsSmall ProjectsStatutory InterpretationLegislative IntentWorker ProtectionContractor ObligationsJudicial ReviewAdministrative Decision
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

DiBlasi v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff Frank DiBlasi sought judicial review of a final determination by the Commissioner of Social Security, who denied his claim for Supplemental Security Income benefits, citing disability due to depression, diabetes, high cholesterol, and limb numbness. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied benefits, a decision affirmed by the Appeals Council. DiBlasi appealed, arguing the Appeals Council failed to consider new material evidence (Dr. Rinzler's assessment), erred by not remanding for clarification of a prior medical opinion, and ignored a psychiatrist's letter. The court found the new evidence cumulative and not material, and that earlier records consistently reflected DiBlasi's difficulties. Ultimately, the court determined that substantial evidence supported the ALJ's finding that DiBlasi could perform simple, routine, unskilled tasks with minimal stress and contact, and that such jobs exist in the national economy. The Commissioner's determination was affirmed.

Supplemental Security IncomeSocial Security BenefitsDisability DeterminationAdministrative Law JudgeAppeals CouncilMedical ImpairmentMental ImpairmentDepressionDiabetesGlobal Assessment of Functioning
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 2015

Browne v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff Kenneth Owen Browne sought judicial review of a final decision by the Commissioner of Social Security, denying his claims for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Browne alleged disability since December 2007 due to conditions like degenerative disc disease, osteoarthritis, and carpal tunnel syndrome. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) previously found Browne not disabled, concluding he retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform light work. The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence. The court also addressed and rejected Browne's arguments regarding the ALJ's application of the treating physician rule, and alleged failures to consider his obesity and medication side effects.

Disability benefitsSocial Security ActJudicial reviewResidual functional capacityTreating physician ruleSubstantial evidenceAdministrative Law JudgeMedical evidenceObesityMedication side effects
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Arbitration Between Monroe County Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n & Monroe County

The petitioner, representing Deputy Sheriffs, challenged an arbitration award concerning holiday pay. Five Deputy Sheriffs, scheduled to work on July 4, 2011, received only eight hours of holiday pay despite being granted the day off, not their regular shift pay plus holiday pay. The petitioner argued that the collective bargaining agreement and Military Law § 249 mandated additional payment. The arbitrator denied the grievance, concluding neither required the additional payment. The Supreme Court confirmed this award, and the appellate court affirmed, finding no excess of arbitral power, no irrational construction of the CBA, and no violation of public policy.

Collective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceArbitration AwardPublic PolicyMilitary LawHoliday PayDeputy SheriffsCPLR Article 75AffirmanceAppellate Review
References
6
Case No. CA 13-01106
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 2014

MONROE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF'S, MTR. OF

Petitioner, a bargaining representative for Deputy Sheriffs, sought to vacate an arbitration award that denied a grievance concerning holiday pay for five members on July 4, 2011. The Deputy Sheriffs were granted the day off with pay but were not compensated for their regular shifts in addition to the holiday pay, which petitioner alleged violated their collective bargaining agreement and Military Law § 249. The arbitrator denied the grievance, concluding that neither the CBA nor Military Law § 249 mandated the additional payment. The Supreme Court confirmed the arbitration award. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, finding the arbitrator did not exceed his authority, his construction of the CBA was not irrational, and the award did not violate public policy.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementHoliday Pay DisputeMilitary Law BenefitsGrievance DenialDeputy SheriffsPublic PolicyVacate ArbitrationAppellate ReviewLabor Relations
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Commissioners of State Insurance Fund v. P.S.G. Construction Co.

The Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund obtained a judgment against Bridgeworks for unpaid workers' compensation premiums. Bridgeworks, prior to its dissolution and without satisfying the judgment, made loans to FSG Construction Co., Inc. The Commissioners then commenced a special proceeding against FSG, alleging the loans were fraudulent under Debtor and Creditor Law § 273-a. The Supreme Court denied the petition, citing the six-year statute of limitations. This appellate court reversed that decision, ruling that the statute of limitations began from the date of judgment entry (April 24, 2009), making the proceeding commenced on April 13, 2010, timely. The matter was remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings on the merits.

Statute of LimitationsFraudulent ConveyanceDebtor and Creditor LawWorkers' Compensation PremiumsUnpaid LoansAppellate ReviewJudgment EnforcementKings CountySpecial ProceedingConstructive Fraud
References
7
Case No. 526927
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2019

Matter of Curry v. Commissioner of N.Y. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles

In Matter of Curry v Commissioner of N.Y. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, petitioner Joseph P. Curry appealed a judgment dismissing his CPLR article 78 petition. Curry's driver's license was revoked in 2012 due to a fifth alcohol-related driving offense. His 2017 application for relicensing and a hardship exception was denied by the Department of Motor Vehicles' Driver Improvement Bureau and affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Board. Curry challenged this denial as arbitrary and capricious, citing rehabilitation efforts and medical needs for a license. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's dismissal, finding the Commissioner's denial was not arbitrary or capricious given Curry's history of multiple relapses, traffic infractions, and an incomplete DWI evaluation, despite his claims of sobriety and medical appointments.

Driver's License RevocationAlcohol-Related OffensesHardship ExceptionCPLR article 78Administrative ReviewArbitrary and Capricious StandardDepartment of Motor VehiclesReissuance DiscretionRehabilitation EffortsMedical Limitations
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,536 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