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

People v. Cuadrado

The Supreme Court granted the defendant's motion under CPL 440.10, vacating an earlier conviction for first-degree assault, due to a perceived jurisdictionally defective waiver of indictment. The Appellate Division reversed this order, denying the defendant's motion and reinstating the original conviction and sentence. The majority held that CPL 440.10(2)(c) bars the defendant from raising an issue in a collateral attack that could have been reviewed on direct appeal, even if it concerns a jurisdictional defect. The court rejected the argument that applying this statutory bar in such a case would be unconstitutional. The dissenting opinion argued that the conviction was void ab initio because the waiver of indictment violated CPL 195.10(2)(b), asserting that such a fundamental jurisdictional defect cannot be procedurally waived.

Criminal ProcedureCPL 440.10Waiver of IndictmentJurisdictional DefectCollateral AttackAppellate ProcedureDue ProcessSuperior Court InformationConstitutional RightsJudgment Vacatur
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 16, 2015

Vera v. Low Income Marketing Corp.

The court modified an order regarding a Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, partially granting the plaintiff's motion against defendant Low Income Marketing Corp. (LIMC) and denying LIMC's motion to dismiss. It affirmed the lower court's decision that a Workers' Compensation Board finding of no employment relationship was not preclusive due to different statutory definitions of 'employment.' The court found that plaintiff Claudio Vera was 'employed' under the Labor Law, entitling him to partial summary judgment against LIMC, the owner. Additionally, the court granted summary judgment to defendant Skyline Scaffolding Group, Inc., dismissing common-law negligence and cross claims against it, as there was no evidence it created the scaffold defect. The final decision modified the order to grant Skyline's motion and otherwise affirmed it.

Labor LawScaffold AccidentSummary JudgmentCollateral EstoppelWorkers' CompensationEmployment DefinitionIndependent ContractorOwner LiabilityGeneral ContractorNegligence
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 06, 1997

LaVigna v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, New York County, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs' cross-motion for discovery and to amend the complaint. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the order. The claims against Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. were dismissed due to the Workers' Compensation Law § 11 exclusivity rule, as plaintiff Robert LaVigna was an employee. Plaintiffs failed to show deliberate conduct to bypass this rule or wanton behavior for punitive damages. Additionally, plaintiffs did not demonstrate that Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc. had knowledge of a defective condition causing fume seepage. The denial of additional discovery was upheld due to lack of diligence, and the motion to add J.T. Falk as a defendant was denied due to the Statute of Limitations and plaintiffs' investigative delinquency.

Workers' Compensation ExclusivitySummary JudgmentDiscoveryComplaint AmendmentStatute of LimitationsUnited in Interest DoctrinePunitive DamagesPremises LiabilityFume ExposureAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sutherland v. City of New York

Norrel Sutherland, a dock builder, was injured on a job site while operating a defective winch motor for Pile Foundation Construction Co., Inc., his employer. He subsequently filed actions against the City of New York, its departments, Ingersoll-Rand Company, and Pile Foundation, alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law, Jones Act, and LHWCA. The Supreme Court initially dismissed claims against Pile under LHWCA and Jones Act, and some Labor Law claims against the City, but denied dismissing the Labor Law § 200 claim against the City. Upon reargument, the court adhered to its prior determinations. Sutherland and the City appealed. This appellate court dismisses several appeals and cross-appeals, upholds the dismissal of Jones Act and Labor Law §§ 240 and 241 (6) claims, and modifies the prior order to grant summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 claim against the City. The court extensively discusses the "dual capacity" employer liability under LHWCA, affirming that Pile's alleged negligence related to employer functions, not vessel owner functions, thus granting Pile immunity. The final decision is to modify and affirm the prior orders.

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation ActJones Act ClaimsLabor Law ClaimsDual Capacity DoctrineVessel Owner NegligenceEmployer ImmunitySummary Judgment AppealConstruction Site SafetyDefective EquipmentMaritime Worker Injury
References
20
Case No. ADJ3883893 (NOR 0153553)
Regular
Apr 29, 2016

Steven Scoggins vs. Ultra-Mar, Inc., Broadspire

This case concerns a lien for radiology services that was allowed by a WCJ despite the defendant claiming defective service. The defendant argued they never received proper notice of the lien claim or the subsequent order allowing it due to outdated address information in the system. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the order allowing the lien, and returned the case to the trial level. This action was based on defective service of the order, making the defendant's petition for reconsideration timely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Allowing LienNotice of Intention (NIT)Compromise and Release (OACR)EAMSService of ProcessOfficial Address RecordWCJLien Conference
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 05, 2005

Mejia v. Levenbaum

The Supreme Court, Bronx County, issued an order concerning motions for summary judgment on Labor Law § 241 (6), § 200, and common-law negligence claims. The court modified the original order, dismissing the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim against all defendants because the plaintiff's activity was deemed a "general clean out," not construction, excavation, or demolition work. Additionally, Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims against defendant Levenbaum were dismissed due to lack of evidence of notice of defect for the out-of-possession landlord and no proof of a design defect or dangerous condition. Claims against Plum Third Street Corp. and Tam Restaurants, Inc. under Labor Law § 200 were affirmed, as the accident was attributed to the manner of work directed by their supervisor rather than a staircase defect.

Labor LawSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityWorker SafetyOut-of-Possession LandlordNegligenceConstruction SiteGeneral Clean OutStaircase AccidentDesign Defect
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bell Aircraft Corp. v. Siegler

The court affirmed both the final and intermediate orders without costs in this matter. The case primarily involved an appeal from an order that had found several defendants guilty of criminal contempt of court. Additionally, the appeal also addressed an order which denied a motion seeking to resettle an order of commitment. Furthermore, a motion to vacate and perpetually stay the orders of commitment was also denied. All presiding judges concurred with the decision.

Criminal ContemptOrder of CommitmentResettlement MotionVacate MotionStay OrdersAppellate ReviewOrder AffirmedJudicial Concurrence
References
1
Case No. ADJ10278577
Regular
Jul 07, 2017

MARIO ESCOBAR vs. NEWBAC ELECTRONICS, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an order allowing a lien and ordering payment. The Board found the defendant's petition for reconsideration was timely filed, as service of the original order was defective and the petition was filed within the extended timeframe after the defendant received the order. Consequently, the Board rescinded the original order and remanded the matter for a hearing on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSet Aside OrderVacate OrderOrder to Pay LienTimelinessServiceAdministrative Law JudgeRescindedDefective Service
References
1
Case No. ADJ771677 (VNO 0438444)
Regular
Jul 21, 2009

VITALINO AJVIX vs. STRICTLY WHOLESALE SIGNS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's order reducing a medical lien claim due to an inadequate trial record and procedural defects. The Board found that no evidence was formally admitted and the WCJ's order was improperly issued to "assist in settlement." The matter is returned for further proceedings and a new decision on the merits of the lien claim. Additionally, the Appeals Board removed the case on its own motion to consider sanctions against the lien claimant's representative for alleged misstatements of law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimReconsiderationRemovalSanctionsCMS NetworkRandal HollienLabor Code section 3202.5Labor Code section 5310Labor Code section 5813
References
1
Case No. ADJ7937768
Regular
Apr 01, 2016

MARTHA SANCHEZ vs. JIB HOLDINGS dba JACK IN THE BOX, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORP.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing its lien. The WCJ initially dismissed the lien for non-appearance at a lien conference, but the lien claimant argued it was not properly served with the Notice of Intention to Dismiss (NOI). Although the NOI was served on the lien claimant's representative at the correct address, making service technically proper, the subsequent dismissal order was defectively served. However, this defect only made the reconsideration petition timely, and the Board denied the petition on its merits, adopting the WCJ's reasoning.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienLien ConferenceMinutes of HearingProof of ServiceOfficial Address RecordHarmless ErrorDefective Service
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 24,310 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