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. 2019 NY Slip Op 09078 [178 AD3d 1268]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 2019

Matter of Donovan v. DOCCS Coxsackie Corr. Facility

Danl D. Donovan, a correction sergeant, sustained a work-related hip injury. His employer, DOCCS Coxsackie Correctional Facility, advanced his wages and sought reimbursement. Following an award for a schedule loss of use, a dispute arose regarding the deduction of attorney fees from the claimant's payment, which the Workers' Compensation Board upheld. While Donovan's appeal was pending before the Appellate Division, the Board issued an amended decision based on a new legal rationale. Consequently, the Appellate Division, Third Department, dismissed the initial appeal as moot.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseAttorney Fee DeductionReimbursement DisputeMoot AppealAppellate DivisionWork-related InjuryWage ReimbursementIndependent Medical ExaminerAdministrative Review
References
2
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02248 [237 AD3d 1379]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2025

Matter of Jehle v. DOCCS Coxsackie Corr. Facility

William Jehle, a correction officer, sustained a work-related injury, prompting his employer, DOCCS Coxsackie Correctional Facility, to continue paying his full wages. The employer sought reimbursement, and Jehle's attorney filed for counsel fees. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim, found a temporary total disability, awarded a credit to the employer for wage reimbursement, and granted counsel fees of $4,300 as a lien against this reimbursement. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision, deeming the lien proper under Workers' Compensation Law § 24 (2) (b). The Appellate Division, Third Department, further affirmed the Board's decision, holding that an award for previously unawarded benefits constitutes an 'increase' under the law, and that counsel fees are appropriately a lien against the employer's reimbursement, dismissing arguments of the employer subsidizing fees.

Counsel FeesLien on AwardEmployer ReimbursementTemporary Total DisabilityWorkers' Compensation LawAppellate ReviewCorrection OfficerWage ReimbursementStatutory InterpretationClaimant Attorney Fees
References
3
Case No. 531543
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2021

Matter of Gilliam v. Doccs Wende Corr. Facility

Claimant Wanda Gilliam, a correction officer, sustained work-related injuries to her right hip and left shoulder in May 2017. Following various medical evaluations, including conflicting opinions from orthopedist Michael Grant and independent examiner Louis Nunez regarding schedule loss of use (SLU), a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded a 60% SLU of her left arm and 57.5% SLU of her right leg. Upon administrative review, the Workers' Compensation Board modified this decision, crediting Nunez's evaluation, and awarded a 30% SLU for her left arm while making no SLU award for her right leg, and also reduced the attorney's fee. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, determining that it was supported by substantial evidence, particularly in resolving conflicting medical opinions and exercising discretion regarding counsel fees. The court found no abuse of discretion in the reduction of attorney's fees, noting the limited period of representation.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of Use (SLU)Left Arm InjuryRight Leg InjuryOrthopedic ExaminationMedical Opinion ConflictAppellate ReviewAttorney FeesDiscretionary AwardSubstantial Evidence
References
17
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 03890
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 20, 2023

Matter of Perry v. DOCCS Clinton Corr. Facility

Claimant Robert Perry, a correction officer, initially filed a workers' compensation claim in January 2017 for injuries to his left hand and wrist. This claim was established, leading to an award for schedule loss of use of his left hand in September 2019. Subsequently, in May 2020, Perry was diagnosed with left elbow epicondylitis, which he sought to include as a causally-related injury to his existing claim. The employer and carrier argued the amendment was untimely under Workers' Compensation Law § 28. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially permitted the amendment, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, deeming the left elbow claim time-barred due to not being filed within two years of the original accident. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board properly found no evidence of an injury to the left elbow in claimant's medical records prior to May 2020, and that the Board, as the sole arbiter of credibility, was free to prioritize medical records over claimant's conflicting testimony regarding earlier elbow pain, thus upholding the denial of the claim and the subsequent denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation LawTimeliness of ClaimLeft Elbow InjuryMedical MisdiagnosisSchedule Loss of UseWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionAppellate DivisionCorrectional OfficerClaim AmendmentStatute of Limitations
References
6
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04063 [195 AD3d 1325]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 24, 2021

Matter of Scano v. DOCCS Taconic Corr. Facility

Steven Scano, an employee, suffered frostbite and a foot wound after moving a car in a snowy parking lot, leading to severe health complications and ultimately his death. He filed a workers' compensation claim but passed away before testifying or undergoing a scheduled independent medical examination. His estate continued the claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board disallowed it, ruling that the claim abated due to his death and the resulting prejudice to the carrier's ability to cross-examine him and have him medically examined. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the record was undeveloped and the carrier's due process rights to a fair trial, including cross-examination and medical examination, were impaired.

Workers' CompensationClaim AbatementDue ProcessIndependent Medical ExaminationCross-examinationEstate of DeceasedAppellate ReviewUndeveloped RecordCausationDiabetic Complications
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re the Arbitration Between Virginia Livermore-Johnson & New York State Department of Corrections & Community Supervision

Petitioner, a Supervising Offender Rehabilitation Coordinator for the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), faced suspension and termination for allegedly disclosing confidential information to her parolee husband. Her disciplinary grievance proceeded to arbitration, where the arbitrator ordered her reinstatement with back pay, finding DOCCS failed to prove probable cause for suspension and did not establish guilt on all aspects of the charge. When DOCCS refused to reinstate her, petitioner sought to confirm the award in Supreme Court. The Supreme Court denied her application and granted DOCCS's cross-motion to vacate the award. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's vacatur. The appellate court found the arbitrator's interim decision regarding probable cause was irrational and exceeded his authority. Furthermore, the Appellate Division concluded that the arbitration award, which would have reinstated petitioner without penalty despite her admission of accessing and sharing confidential DOCCS information with a parolee, violated a strong public policy against such disclosures, as outlined in Public Officers Law § 74 and DOCCS's own directives. Consequently, the award was properly vacated.

Arbitration Award VacaturPublic Policy ViolationConfidential Information DisclosureDepartment of CorrectionsEmployee DisciplineCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrator AuthorityJudicial ReviewState Employee MisconductAdministrative Law
References
15
Case No. CV-23-1977
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of William Jehle

The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed an award of counsel fees to the claimant's attorney, William Jehle, as a lien against the employer's reimbursement. The employer, DOCCS Coxsackie Correctional Facility, appealed this decision. The court, led by Aarons, J.P., reviewed the application of Workers' Compensation Law § 24 (2) (b) and § 24 (4). The decision clarified that counsel fees can be awarded as a lien on compensation even if it's subject to employer reimbursement, especially when the award increases previous periods of disability benefits. The court affirmed the Board's decision, noting the employer remains eligible for full reimbursement from future compensation awards.

Counsel FeesWorkers' Compensation LawLien on AwardEmployer ReimbursementTemporary Total DisabilityAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationJudicial DepartmentWorkers' Compensation BoardLegal Precedent
References
4
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02170 [203 AD3d 1509]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2022

Matter of Streety v. Annucci

Charles Streety, convicted of sexual abuse in the first degree in 1988, sought a Certificate of Good Conduct (CGC) from the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) to qualify for a waiver to drive a school bus. DOCCS denied the application, citing inconsistency with public interest, without detailing its reasoning beyond the conviction itself. Streety initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which was dismissed by the Supreme Court, Albany County. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found that DOCCS's denial was arbitrary and capricious because it failed to articulate a factual basis beyond the conviction, as required by Correction Law § 703-b. The court annulled DOCCS's determination and remitted the matter for reconsideration.

Certificate of Good ConductSexual Abuse First DegreeVehicle and Traffic LawCorrection Law Article 23Public InterestAdministrative ReviewArbitrary and CapriciousRemittalSchool Bus Driver DisqualificationRehabilitation
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 13, 2014

Allessi v. New York State Department of Corrections & Community Supervision

The plaintiff, an employee at a DOCCS shock incarceration facility, filed an employment discrimination action against DOCCS and its superintendent, Ronald W. Moscicki. She alleged gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII and NYSHRL, and a § 1983 claim against Moscicki. The claims stemmed from derogatory comments, disparate treatment compared to a coworker in a romantic relationship with Moscicki, changes in work schedule, and an increased caseload after she filed an internal complaint. The court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss, finding the NYSHRL claims barred by sovereign immunity and the other claims failing to state a plausible cause of action for adverse employment action, sex-based harassment, or retaliation.

Employment DiscriminationGender DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationTitle VII Civil Rights ActNew York State Human Rights Law42 U.S.C. § 1983Sovereign ImmunityMotion to DismissFederal Court
References
47
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04638 [197 AD3d 800]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 05, 2021

Matter of McMillian v. Krygier

Petitioner, an incarcerated person, challenged a reduction in his pay rate by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) after refusing to participate in recommended programming. His grievance was denied by the facility Superintendent and his subsequent appeal to the Central Office Review Committee (CORC) remained undecided for over eight months. Petitioner then initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which the Supreme Court dismissed on the merits. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment. The court found that exhaustion of administrative remedies was excused due to both futility and the presence of pure questions of law, concluding that DOCCS's policies linking pay reduction to program refusal were within its statutory authority and were properly applied.

Inmate RightsPrison AdministrationAdministrative RemediesExhaustion DoctrineCPLR Article 78 ReviewNew York State LawCorrectional FacilitiesDue ProcessGrievance ProceduresJudicial Review
References
30
Showing 1-10 of 20 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