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

MacK v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

Plaintiff Michael Mack sued The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Dr. Scott Bergman for racial discrimination, hostile work environment, and wrongful termination under 42 U.S.C. sections 1981 and 1983, and New York Executive Law section 296. Mack, an African-American employee, alleged his supervisor, Iannacone, and Dr. Bergman subjected him to racial jokes, disparate treatment, and a hostile work environment. Mack was terminated after failing a drug test and refusing to provide a second urine sample, which he claimed was racially motivated. The defendants moved for summary judgment. The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, dismissing all claims, finding that Mack failed to demonstrate a municipal policy or custom for the Port Authority's liability and did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claims of wrongful termination or a racially hostile work environment. Additionally, state law claims were dismissed as New York anti-discrimination laws do not apply to the bi-state Port Authority.

Racial DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentWrongful TerminationSummary Judgment42 U.S.C. Section 198142 U.S.C. Section 1983Port AuthorityBi-State AgencyMunicipal LiabilityDrug Testing
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Michael B.

This appeal concerns six-year-old Michael B., born with cocaine toxicology and placed in foster care with his foster parents (appellant foster mother and Quintín L.). Following a prior reversal by the Appellate Division, which mandated a best-interests hearing, the Family Court awarded custody to Michael's natural father. The Appellate Division now reverses this decision, finding that the child's best interests are served by awarding custody to the foster parents. The court cited the child's strong bond with his foster parents, the natural father's deficient parenting, lack of emotional support, and potential for emotional and physical harm. The case is remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for a hearing to determine the father's visitation rights.

Parental Rights TerminationChild CustodyBest Interests of ChildFoster CareChild NeglectPsychological EvaluationFamily LawAppellate ReviewParental FitnessVisitation Rights
References
8
Case No. ADJ11053430; ADJ14397522
Regular
Jun 23, 2025

MICHAEL FISHEL vs. RICK'S LUBE AND COMPLETE AUTO, OAK RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Michael Fishel, an auto mechanic, sustained an injury to his back and other body parts on August 18, 2017, while employed by Rick's Lube and Complete Auto, insured by Oak River Insurance Company. The case involved extensive litigation concerning the necessity of lumbar spine surgery and the waiver of the Utilization Review/Independent Medical Review process, leading to the appointment of Dr. Laura Hatch. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, rescinding and substituting a prior Findings and Award. The Board's decision clarified Dr. Hatch's appointment date and the scope of her evaluation, ultimately upholding the award for the applicant's lumbar spine surgery based on Dr. Hatch's medical opinions.

AOE/COEUR/IMRRegular PhysicianStipulationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code Section 5701Lumbar Spine SurgeryQualified Medical EvaluatorPrimary Treating Physician
References
23
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 07702
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2018

Findlater v. Catering by Michael Schick, Inc.

The plaintiff, Christopher Findlater, sued Catering by Michael Schick, Inc., for personal injuries sustained when a food rack fell on him. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the action was barred by the Workers' Compensation Law's exclusivity provisions, claiming Findlater was an employee. Findlater cross-moved for summary judgment, asserting defendant's negligence and his status as an independent contractor. The Supreme Court denied the defendant's motion and granted Findlater's cross-motion, concluding he was an independent contractor. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the order, finding that the question of Findlater's employment status created a factual dispute that must be resolved by the Workers' Compensation Board. However, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's determination of negligence against Catering by Michael Schick, Inc. The case was remitted to the Supreme Court for new determinations pending the Board's decision.

Personal InjuryWorkers' Compensation LawIndependent Contractor StatusSummary JudgmentNegligenceAppellate ReviewRemittalEmployment LawFactual DisputeExclusivity Provisions
References
4
Case No. CV-23-1648
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 20, 2025

Matter of Ava OO. (Michael NN.)

This is an appeal from a Family Court order adjudicating children neglected and directing the father, Michael NN., to undergo sex offender treatment. Michael NN. and the mother, Leanna MM., consented to a neglect finding after allegations of domestic violence and child sexual abuse by the father. A key condition was for the father to complete a sex offender evaluation. Although the father submitted an evaluation, the Family Court deemed it insufficient as it was not from the named evaluator, was perfunctory, and lacked a crucial section completion. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding a sound and substantial basis in the record for not returning the youngest child to the father's care until he obtains a proper sex offender evaluation and engages with recommended treatment. The court also ruled an argument regarding an expired order of protection as moot.

Family LawChild NeglectAppellate ReviewSex Offender EvaluationDispositional OrderBest Interests of the ChildFamily Court Act Article 10Consent OrderMootnessParental Rights
References
13
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 06407 [199 AD3d 1204]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2021

Matter of Quinn v. Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc.

Claimant Thomas E. Quinn sustained a work-related injury and later entered into a settlement agreement for future indemnity benefits. The employer's third-party administrator agreed to pay Quinn, and the Special Funds Conservation Committee agreed to reimburse the administrator. The administrator sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund (SDF) more than eight years after payment, which the Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially approved. However, the Workers' Compensation Board, upon reconsideration, found the request untimely under Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (8) (h) (2) (B), ruling that the SDF was not required to reimburse. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board had jurisdiction to review the applicability of the statutory time limitations and that the administrator's reimbursement request was indeed untimely.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsSpecial Disability FundReimbursement ClaimTimeliness RequirementSettlement AgreementWaiver of Indemnity BenefitsWorkers' Compensation Law § 15(8)(h)(2)(B)Board's Continuing JurisdictionJudicial ReviewThird-Party Administrator Liability
References
5
Case No. ADJ6631604
Regular
Aug 02, 2011

MICHAEL DAVIS vs. MICHAEL CADILLAC, INC., EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed a prior decision denying the applicant's claim for an industrial back injury. The WCAB found that the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof for demonstrating injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE). They determined that the medical report of Dr. Touton constituted substantial evidence supporting the denial, while the applicant's preferred medical opinion from Dr. Scherman was less persuasive. One commissioner dissented, believing Dr. Scherman's report, corroborated by the applicant's testimony, supported a finding of cumulative injury.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Ordersubstantial evidencemedical opinioncausationcumulative injuryWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJDissenting Opinion
References
4
Case No. ADJ6706991
Regular
Sep 16, 2011

MICHAEL GRAHAM vs. PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

Applicant Michael Graham sought reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision that awarded a 24% permanent disability rating for a back injury sustained on October 3, 2008. Graham argued for a higher rating based on medical reports from Dr. Chen and Dr. Roth. The WCAB denied reconsideration, adopting the reasoning of the administrative law judge's report. The Board also addressed a procedural issue regarding the timeliness of its review, finding its decision to be timely due to the date of actual notice of the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityQualified Medical EvaluatorPrimary Treating PhysicianLabor Code § 5909Due ProcessActual Notice
References
2
Case No. ADJ8024294
Regular
Jun 23, 2015

MICHAEL BULLOCK vs. THE REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF RIVERSIDE, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered By SEDGWICK CLAIMS SERVICES

This case involves Michael Bullock's workers' compensation claim against the Regents of the University of Riverside for cumulative trauma, psyche, and sleep disorders. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's finding of no industrial injury. The WCJ found Dr. Alice Martinson's report substantial evidence of no industrial causation, as it considered applicant's showering incident at home and a job analysis indicating less demanding duties. The WCJ also excluded Dr. Thomas Jackson's prior report due to procedural delays and found applicant's primary treating physician's opinion unsubstantial due to a failure to review key medical records and the job analysis.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedSubstantial Medical EvidenceWCJPQMEPrimary Treating PhysicianIndustrial CausationAOE/COECumulative TraumaJob Analysis
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thomas v. City of Troy

Adrian Thomas filed a civil rights action against City Defendants (City of Troy, Adam R. Mason, Ronald Fountain, Tim Colaneri) and County Defendants (County of Rensselaer, Dr. Michael Sikirica) alleging malicious prosecution, violation of fair trial rights, failure to intervene, and conspiracy. The claims arise from his conviction for his son's murder, based on an allegedly coerced confession and a fabricated autopsy report by Dr. Sikirica. His conviction was later overturned, and he was acquitted in a re-trial. The Court addressed three motions to dismiss, granting in part and denying in part for both sets of defendants regarding Plaintiff's claims. Specifically, Plaintiff's malicious prosecution and certain conspiracy claims survived, while fair trial, failure to intervene, and municipal liability claims were dismissed as untimely or for failing to state a claim. City Defendants' cross-claims against County Defendants for indemnification and contribution were also dismissed.

Civil RightsSection 1983Malicious ProsecutionFabricated EvidenceCoerced ConfessionAutopsy ReportMunicipal LiabilityQualified ImmunityAbsolute ImmunityMotion to Dismiss
References
79
Showing 1-10 of 2,016 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