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

Carter v. Bane

Petitioner Shirley Carter, the paternal grandmother of Javette Alexander, challenged a New York State Department of Social Services (NYS-DSS) decision disallowing foster care payments for Javette from May 2, 1986, onwards. While payments were approved for an earlier period, NYS-DSS argued Carter's foster parent status lapsed upon the expiration of a Family Court placement order. The court found that the New York City Department of Social Services (NYC-DSS) failed in its statutory duty to extend or review Javette's placement, effectively abandoning the child and unjustly changing Carter's status from a paid caregiver to a volunteer. The court granted Carter's application, ordering retroactive foster care payments from May 2, 1986, and remanded the case for a review of Javette's legal status.

Foster Care PaymentsChild CustodyArticle 78 ProceedingGrandparent RightsNeglect PetitionPlacement OrderAbandoned ChildGovernment Agency ResponsibilityKinship Foster CareRetroactive Payments
References
5
Case No. ADJ10443669
Regular
Oct 04, 2017

Donna Carter vs. Rose International Group, OneBeacon Insurance Group

The Appeals Board affirmed the Workers' Compensation Judge's finding that Donna Carter sustained an industrial injury to her right knee and left wrist on May 18, 2016. Despite inconsistencies in the applicant's testimony regarding a slip and fall incident, her account was corroborated by a witness who found her on the floor. Medical records from the day of the incident also supported the applicant's claim, establishing a clear mechanism of injury. The Board found that the common sense nature of a slip and fall does not require expert medical opinion to establish industrial causation for the incident itself.

ADJ10443669Rose International GroupOneBeacon Insurance GroupDonna CarterWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationslip and fallindustrial injuryright kneeleft wrist
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carter v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

Ava Carter, an EMT with FDNY, suffered spinal and hand injuries from a 1995 line-of-duty ambulance accident. Her employment was terminated in August 2008 due to medical separation. She applied for both line-of-duty and non-line-of-duty disability pensions under Retirement and Social Security Law §§ 607-b and 605, respectively. While her non-line-of-duty pension was approved in October 2009, respondents refused to consider her § 607-b application because her employment had been terminated prior to applying. Carter challenged this refusal, arguing timeliness and that § 605's filing requirements should apply to § 607-b. The court found the petition timely but denied it, concluding that § 607-b requires applicants to be employed at the time of filing, and § 605's extended filing period does not apply to § 607-b.

Disability pensionLine of duty injuryEmergency Medical TechnicianEmployment terminationStatute of limitationsAdministrative reviewStatutory interpretationNew York City Employees' Retirement SystemReflex Sympathetic DystrophyCarpal Tunnel Syndrome
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Carter A.

This case concerns an appeal from a Family Court order that adjudicated Carter A. as an abandoned child and terminated the respondent-father's parental rights. The child was removed from parental custody in October 2011 and subsequently placed in foster care after a neglect finding against the father. The petitioner initiated abandonment proceedings in June 2012, alleging the father failed to visit or communicate with the child or the petitioner for the statutory six-month period. The Appellate Court affirmed the Family Court's decision, concluding that clear and convincing evidence supported the finding of abandonment, as the father's few contacts were sporadic and primarily petitioner-initiated. The court also rejected the father's arguments regarding a suspended judgment and alleged defects in the petition, affirming the termination of parental rights.

Parental Rights TerminationAbandonmentChild NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewFoster CareIncarcerated ParentCommunication FailureVisitation RightsClear and Convincing Evidence
References
11
Case No. CV-24-1036
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 11, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Donna Brickner

Claimant Donna Brickner appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board, which found she did not sustain a permanent total disability but rather a permanent partial disability of 90% following a work injury in 2019. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a permanent partial disability based on a carrier consultant's opinion that claimant was capable of sedentary work with significant restrictions. Claimant sought administrative review, arguing for a permanent total disability based on medical evidence. The Board affirmed its decision, relying on the claimant's treating physician's findings and the claimant's self-reported functional abilities, which indicated she was capable of greater activity than the carrier's consultant suggested, thus concluding there was insufficient credible medical evidence for a permanent total disability.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityPermanent Total DisabilityMedical EvidenceLumbar Spine InjuryChronic Pain SyndromeSedentary Work RestrictionsDisability AssessmentAdministrative ReviewAppellate Decision
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sheridan v. Carter

The plaintiffs, Fontaine Sheridan and Donald Sheridan, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County. The original order had granted the defendant Domestic Workers United's (DWU) motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action in a defamation case, and also granted defendant Cindy Carter's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against her. The appellate court reversed this order, denying both DWU's motion to dismiss and Carter's motion for summary judgment. The case stemmed from Carter's allegations of abuse and exploitation by the Sheridans, which were published in newspapers and circulated by DWU in flyers, leading the Sheridans to sue for defamation. The appellate court found sufficient allegations for a libel claim against DWU and that Carter failed to prove the truth of her defamatory statements.

DefamationLibelSummary JudgmentMotion to DismissCPLR 3211(a)(7)Appellate ReviewPublic ConcernDomestic WorkersAbuse AllegationsImmigration Status
References
18
Case No. CV-23-1425
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 13, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Harold Hanson (dec'd) Donna Hanson

The Appellate Division reversed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying death benefits to Donna Hanson for her deceased husband, Harold Hanson. Harold, a field service technician for General Electric, died from an acute aortic dissection, which claimant alleged was work-related. The case involved extensive procedural history, including a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially establishing the claim, followed by the Board's rescission and subsequent preclusion of claimant's medical evidence, specifically reports from Dr. Stern and Dr. Basri. The WCLJ ultimately disallowed the claim due to a lack of medical evidence, a decision affirmed by the Board. The Appellate Division found the Board's reasoning for precluding evidence inconsistent with its assertion that claimant had "ample opportunity" to submit proof, and also noted the Board's reliance on an inaccurate reading of the record, necessitating a remittal for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation LawDeath Benefits ClaimCausal RelationshipAortic DissectionHypertensionMedical Report AdmissibilityProcedural ErrorsPresumption of CompensabilityBurden ShiftingAppellate Division
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carter v. Caring for the Homeless of Peekskill, Inc.

This Title VII action concerns a male employee, Mr. Larry Carter, who alleged sexual harassment and constructive discharge by Dr. Janet Foy, Chairman of the Board of Directors of his employer, Caring for the Homeless of Peekskill, Inc. The alleged harassment followed the termination of a consensual sexual relationship between Carter and Foy. After a jury found in favor of Carter, the defendants moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The court examined the alleged incidents of harassment, including off-premises confrontations and a request for resignation, and concluded that they did not constitute a hostile work environment or constructive discharge under Title VII standards. The court determined that the issues arose from a 'failed affair' rather than workplace harassment. Consequently, the defendants' motion was granted, and judgment was entered in their favor.

Sexual HarassmentConstructive DischargeTitle VIIJury Verdict OverturnedJudgment Notwithstanding VerdictHostile Work EnvironmentFailed Personal RelationshipEmployment LawFederal District CourtEmployee Rights
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Donna v. Dodd, Mead & Co., Inc.

Natalie Donna, co-author of the children's book *Boy of the Masai*, sued her co-author, Peter Larsen, and publisher, Dodd, Mead & Company, alleging copyright infringement, conspiracy to infringe, and unfair trade practices. Donna's claims arose from three subsequent books by Larsen and his wife, which used a similar format to their original collaboration. Donna contended that *Boy of the Masai* was a composite work, implying separate copyrights for her text. The court, however, applied Second Circuit precedent, ruling that *Boy of the Masai* is a joint work, where co-owners cannot infringe their own copyright. Consequently, the court dismissed the copyright infringement and conspiracy claims, and the unfair trade practices claim was also dismissed due to a lack of pendent jurisdiction, resulting in the dismissal of the complaint in its entirety.

copyright lawjoint authorshipintellectual propertypublishing contractslegal precedentfederal courtjurisdictionliterary propertyco-ownershipinfringement claims
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Katulak v. Carter

John Katulak, the plaintiff, was involved in an automobile accident at an intersection in Wawayanda, New York, where a stop sign was missing. He subsequently initiated a personal injury action against Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (the appellant), Lloyd A. Carter, and Thomas Leichliter. The appellant, in turn, filed a third-party action against the County of Orange. The Supreme Court initially denied the appellant's motion for summary judgment but granted similar motions by Carter, Leichliter, and the County. On appeal, the higher court reversed the Supreme Court's decision, granting summary judgment to Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., thereby dismissing all claims and cross claims asserted against them. The appeals pertaining to the second and third orders were dismissed.

Personal InjuryAutomobile AccidentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewNegligenceRoadway ConditionMissing Traffic SignCausationThird Party ActionCounty Liability
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 116 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