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

Wallace v. Teal

This proceeding addresses the custody of Anne Wallace, an out-of-wedlock child of petitioner John Wallace and respondent Karen Teal. The court confirmed John Wallace's paternity and reviewed the circumstances of both parents, including neglect proceedings initiated against the mother and the child's placement in foster care. Acknowledging the father's consistent interest and ability to provide a stable environment, the court departed from the traditional 'natural mother's prima facie right' standard. Citing recent Supreme Court and New York Court of Appeals precedents that challenge gender-based distinctions in parental rights, the court applied the 'best interests of the child' standard and awarded custody to the petitioner father, while granting the respondent mother liberal visitation rights.

Child CustodyPaternityOut-of-Wedlock ChildBest Interests of the ChildFamily LawDue ProcessEqual ProtectionGender DiscriminationVisitation RightsNeglect Proceedings
References
12
Case No. 528676
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 23, 2020

Matter of Wallace v. Don Sebastiani & Sons

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying Jerome T. Wallace's claim for reduced earnings benefits. Wallace, who suffered a lower back injury in 2011, subsequently left his full-time job as a regional sales manager in March 2017 after an orthopedic surgeon imposed work restrictions based on his subjective complaints of increased pain. He then worked part-time as an independent contractor for less compensation. Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded benefits, the Board rescinded them, finding Wallace's reduced earnings not causally related to his disability. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to its finding that Wallace's testimony regarding increased pain was incredible given the lack of objective medical evidence to support new work restrictions, thereby failing to establish a causal link between his disability and reduced earnings.

Workers' CompensationReduced EarningsPermanent Partial DisabilityLumbar Spinal StenosisDegenerative Disc DiseaseWork RestrictionsCausal RelationCredibilityObjective Medical EvidenceAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 08397 [177 AD3d 864]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 20, 2019

Landaverde v. Lin-Ann Enters., Inc.

Plaintiff Olga D. Landaverde suffered injuries after slipping on ice on property owned by defendant Lin-Ann Enterprises, Inc. Having received Workers' Compensation benefits, she initiated a personal injury action against the defendant. Lin-Ann Enterprises, Inc. sought summary judgment, asserting it was an alter ego of Landaverde's employer, Logan Bus Co., Inc., and thus immune under Workers' Compensation Law. The Supreme Court denied this motion, a decision affirmed by the Appellate Division, Second Department. The appellate court found the defendant failed to demonstrate prima facie evidence of an alter ego relationship, specifically lacking proof that the entities operated as a single integrated unit or that one controlled the other's daily operations.

Slip and FallPremises LiabilityWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityAlter Ego DoctrineSummary JudgmentAppellate DivisionPersonal Injury DamagesCorporate VeilIntegrated EntityDay-to-day Operations Control
References
6
Case No. ADJ10452924
Regular
Sep 05, 2018

ANN MALESZA vs. MARIN WALDORF SCHOOL, CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a dispute over temporary disability indemnity for Ann Malesza, who claimed injury to her heart and psyche. The defendant sought to limit temporary disability to 4-6 weeks, challenging the reliance on Dr. Taylor's psychiatric evaluation. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's award of up to 104 weeks of temporary disability. This decision was based on Dr. Taylor's finding that the applicant was unable to work due to severe anxiety and phobia of returning to a stressful environment, which the Board deemed substantial evidence. The defendant's inability to provide a stress-free work environment does not relieve their liability for temporary disability.

WCABAnn MaleszaMarin Waldorf SchoolChurch Mutual Insurance CompanyADJ10452924Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJAOE/COEheart injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ9485504
Regular
Apr 22, 2025

MARY ANNE AIKENS vs. CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Applicant Mary Anne Aikens sought reconsideration of a Findings and Award (F&A) from April 15, 2021, regarding injuries sustained in 2009. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded the F&A, finding errors in the WCJ's decision regarding apportionment of permanent disability for both orthopedic and psychological injuries. The Board concluded that the medical reports from AME Dr. Joel Renbaum and AME Dr. James Cole lacked sufficient independent justification for their apportionment findings. Consequently, the case was returned to the trial level for further development of the medical record concerning apportionment.

ApportionmentPermanent DisabilityCervical SpineRight ShoulderRight HipBilateral KneesPsycheAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Dr. RenbaumDr. Cole
References
13
Case No. CV-06-5848
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 10, 2007

Berrios v. STATE UNIV. OF NEW YORK AT STONY BROOK

This civil rights action was brought by Miguel Berrios, Ann Berrios, and Kimberly Conlon against the State University of New York at Stony Brook and individual faculty members, alleging violations of their First Amendment and Due Process rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986. The claims stemmed from alleged retaliation following Dr. Berrios's discovery of scientific data falsification by a defendant and subsequent harassment. Defendants moved to dismiss all claims. The court granted in part and denied in part, dismissing Dr. Berrios's claims predating a prior settlement due to res judicata, Kimberly Conlon's freedom of association claim, and all Plaintiffs' Due Process claims. Other claims related to First Amendment rights were allowed to proceed, with further factual development needed on issues of qualified immunity and statute of limitations.

Civil RightsFirst AmendmentDue ProcessRetaliationFree SpeechFreedom of AssociationRes JudicataEleventh Amendment ImmunityMotion to DismissPublic Employment
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 19, 2019

Winder v. Berryhill

Plaintiff Anne Winder challenged the Social Security Administration's denial of disability insurance benefits, alleging disability due to carpal tunnel syndrome, trigger fingers, bipolar disorder, and type II diabetes. The case, initially heard by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who found Winder not disabled, proceeded to the District Court after the Appeals Council denied review. Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields recommended affirming the Commissioner's decision, which the Plaintiff objected to, challenging the ALJ's severe impairment finding, evaluation of medical opinions from treating and examining physicians (Dr. Healy, Dr. Rudansky, Dr. Johnkutty) versus a medical expert (Dr. Fuchs), and credibility assessment. Presiding Judge Arthur D. Spatt reviewed the objections, adopting the R&R and affirming the Defendant's decision, finding no clear error in the ALJ's conclusions regarding the Plaintiff's functional capacity and ability to perform other work.

Social Security DisabilityAdministrative LawDisability BenefitsReport and RecommendationMedical Opinion EvaluationCredibility AssessmentResidual Functional CapacityFive-Step Sequential EvaluationCarpal Tunnel SyndromeBipolar Disorder
References
37
Case No. 02 Civ. 4286, 02 Civ. 4297
Regular Panel Decision

Wallace v. Buttar

Petitioners David Jacaruso, Joseph Scotti, and Michael E. Wallace moved to vacate an arbitration award issued in favor of respondents Daljit S. Buttar and Par-amit Buttar. The Buttars cross-moved to confirm the award. The arbitration, conducted by the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD), found the petitioners liable for misrepresentation, unauthorized trading, and fraud, and also as 'Control Persons,' jointly and severally liable for compensatory and punitive damages. The District Court, applying standards of 'manifest disregard of the law' and 'manifest disregard of the facts,' found that the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law by imposing respondeat superior liability on the petitioners for actions of a broker and by finding fraud liability without evidence of intent. Furthermore, the court found the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law and facts regarding control person liability. Consequently, the court granted the petitioners' motion to vacate the arbitration award and denied the respondents' cross-motion to confirm it.

arbitrationvacaturconfirmationsecurities fraudcontrol person liabilitymanifest disregard of lawmanifest disregard of factsNASD arbitrationpunitive damagesrespondeat superior
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Berrios v. State University of New York at Stony Brook

Plaintiffs Miguel Berrios, Ann Berrios, and Kimberly A. Conlon initiated a civil rights action against the State University of New York at Stony Brook and several individual faculty members, alleging violations of their First Amendment and Due Process rights. The claims stem from alleged retaliation after Dr. Berrios uncovered scientific data falsification in 1995. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss based on several grounds, including res judicata and Eleventh Amendment immunity. The court granted the motion in part and denied in part, dismissing certain claims such as those predating Dr. Berrios's prior settlement, Conlon's freedom of association claim, and all Due Process claims. However, other First Amendment claims, including free speech for Dr. Berrios and Conlon, and freedom of association for Ann Berrios, were permitted to proceed to discovery.

Civil RightsFirst AmendmentFreedom of SpeechFreedom of AssociationDue ProcessRetaliationRes JudicataEleventh Amendment ImmunityMotion to DismissPublic Employees
References
44
Case No. 532612
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Anne O'Donnell

In this Workers' Compensation case, claimant Anne O'Donnell, a nurse, sustained work-related injuries. The employer, University of Rochester, sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund under Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d) due to preexisting conditions. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found the employer entitled to reimbursement based on a pretrial conference statement. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, ruling the statement was not legally binding without Board approval, and discharged the Special Disability Fund from liability. The employer's subsequent application for reconsideration was denied. The Appellate Division affirmed both decisions, rejecting the employer's arguments that the pretrial conference statement was preclusive or that estoppel/laches applied, citing lack of proper Board approval for the statement.

Permanent Partial DisabilitySpecial Disability FundReimbursementPretrial Conference StatementBoard ApprovalEstoppelLachesReconsiderationAppellate ReviewSlip and Fall
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 1,486 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