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
Oct 12, 1978

Claim of Falcone v. Western Electric Co.

The case involves an appeal of a Workers' Compensation Board decision that set the claimant's date of disablement as July 30, 1973. The claimant, an employee of Western Electric Company, Inc., developed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease due to polyurethane exposure, initially experiencing symptoms in 1966. While a medical report from Dr. Ehret in 1966 identified bronchial asthma, the condition was not considered disabling until July 30, 1973, when the claimant first lost work time due to respiratory issues. The Board's decision, which also discharged the Special Fund from liability under section 25-a of the Workers’ Compensation Law, was affirmed by the appellate court, finding substantial evidence to support the determination of the disablement date.

Occupational DiseaseChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseBronchial AsthmaPolyurethane ExposureToluene Diisocyanate (TD1)Date of DisablementWorkers' Compensation LawSpecial FundsSubstantial EvidenceMedical Testimony
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mair-Headley v. County of Westchester

The petitioner, a correction officer, was terminated from her employment by the Westchester County Department of Corrections after being absent for over one year due to a nonoccupational injury, pursuant to Civil Service Law § 73. She challenged this determination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, alleging denial of due process and violation of the Human Rights Law. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the due process claim and transferred the remaining issues to this Court. This Court confirmed the determination, finding that the petitioner received adequate pre-termination notice and a post-termination hearing, satisfying due process. Additionally, the Court concluded that the termination did not violate the Human Rights Law, as employers are not obligated to create new light-duty or permanent light-duty positions for accommodation.

Civil Service LawCPLR Article 78Due ProcessHuman Rights LawEmployment TerminationCorrection OfficerDisability AccommodationWestchester CountyAppellate ReviewPublic Employment
References
21
Case No. ADJ6985337
Regular
Jul 02, 2012

Richard Brennan vs. Los Angeles Kings, Federal Insurance Company

This case concerns a workers' compensation applicant whose deposition was repeatedly missed, delaying discovery. The defendant employer requested removal of an order setting a trial date due to due process concerns regarding discovery and trial scope. The Appeals Board granted removal, amending the prior order to allow the admission of qualified medical examiner deposition transcripts, finding the defendant exercised due diligence. The Board affirmed the trial date but ensured the record would remain open for these crucial depositions.

Petition for RemovalDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedOther SettlementDue ProcessDiscoveryDepositionQualified Medical EvaluatorsQMEMandatory Settlement ConferenceMSC
References
0
Case No. ADJ3395089 (STK 0177203)
Regular
Mar 20, 2009

ROBERT MILLER vs. CAROL-CARTER DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a monetary sanction proposed against attorney Michael Linn by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Linn objected to the sanction, claiming he was denied due process due to a discrepancy in the service date of the WCAB's Notice of Intention. While the Notice stated a February 13, 2009 service date, Linn's evidence indicated actual service on February 17, 2009. Despite this, the WCAB acknowledges the discrepancy but notes Linn's objection was timely based on the actual service date. Consequently, the WCAB grants Linn an additional five days to file further objections.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMonetary SanctionsMichael LinnEsq.Notice of IntentionGood CauseDue ProcessRequisite NoticeObjectionsTimely Response
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 14, 1979

Bock v. Burns, Van Kirk, Greene & Kafer

The claimant-appellant's motion dated February 14, 1979, was denied without costs. Additionally, the court, on its own motion, dismissed the appeal from the board's decision filed September 29, 1978. The dismissal was based on the determination being nonfinal and therefore not appealable at this time. The court noted that dismissing the appeal should expedite the examination of the claimant by impartial specialists, which had been delayed due to the appeal's pendency. The claimant retains the right to seek review of any adverse rulings from the September 29, 1978 decision upon an appeal from the board's final decision in the case.

Motion PracticeAppeal DismissalNon-Final OrderExpedited ExaminationImpartial Specialists
References
0
Case No. ADJ9384895
Regular
Sep 08, 2017

JOSE MARIO OLIVER vs. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICESIHSS, YORK RISK SERVICES

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision concerning his neck and low back injury. The applicant's petition argued the permanent and stationary date was incorrect, future medical treatment should have been awarded, and attorney fees were due. The Board denied reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's findings regarding the permanent and stationary date based on the Agreed Medical Examiner's substantial evidence. The Board also affirmed no attorney fees were awarded due to overpayment by EDD, and the issue of future medical treatment was not properly raised at trial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent and Stationary DateAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Substantial EvidenceAttorney FeesDuplication of BenefitsEDD LienFuture Medical Treatment
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 1991

Ortiz v. Regan

Bernice Ortiz, a NYSLRS pensioner, sued NYSLRS and several officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging deprivation of property without due process. Her pension benefits were suspended and then reduced based on a disputed birth date without proper notice or a hearing. The court previously found procedural due process violations and now grants Ortiz's motion for summary judgment on liability. As a remedy, the court orders a timely and constitutionally adequate hearing before NYSLRS to determine her correct birth date, awards nominal damages of one dollar, and grants attorney's fees.

Procedural Due ProcessPension BenefitsRetirement SystemsSummary JudgmentProperty RightsNotice and Hearing42 U.S.C. § 1983Eleventh AmendmentCompensatory DamagesNominal Damages
References
17
Case No. ADJ8015413 ADJ8015417 ADJ8015421
Regular
Jan 05, 2016

INOCENCIA BALADEZ vs. COAST PLATING, INCORPORATED, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for reconsideration filed by lien claimants whose liens were dismissed for failure to appear at a continued hearing. The WCAB found that the lien claimants had actual notice of the October 1, 2015 hearing date, as their representative was present at a September 18, 2015 conference where the adjournment was announced. Their claim of denial of due process due to lack of written notice was rejected because their own representative's inadvertent failure to calendar the date constituted an internal error, not a lack of notice from the Board. The WCAB also admonished the lien claimants' representatives for failing to properly notify of a change in representation.

WCABLien claimantsReconsiderationDismissalNon-appearanceLien conferenceDue processAdequate noticeMinutes of HearingAdjournment
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Ricciardi v. Leather

The claimant, a machine worker, suffered sinus tarsi syndrome due to repetitive work tasks. Initially, C.N.A. Insurance Company defended the claim based on a March 1997 disablement date. However, after a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found a November 1998 disablement date, CNA sought to shift responsibility to EBI/Royal and SunAlliance. The Workers’ Compensation Board estopped CNA from disclaiming coverage by applying the doctrine of laches. The Appellate Division reversed this decision, finding insufficient evidence that EBI suffered actual prejudice due to CNA's delay in raising the coverage issue, and remitted the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseSinus Tarsi SyndromeRepetitive Strain InjuryFoot InjuryInsurance Coverage DisputeDate of DisablementDoctrine of LachesEstoppelPrejudice
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Petty v. Dresser Industries

The decedent, a chipper, developed silicosis/pneumoconiosis due to workplace silica exposure and died in May 1997. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge awarded death benefits to his widow, attributing the death to an occupational disease and ruling that the Special Funds Conservation Committee would reimburse the employer after a 260-week waiting period starting May 14, 1997. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending that under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8) (ee), reimbursement should commence after 104 weeks from July 15, 1993, the date of diagnosis, as this date preceded August 1, 1994. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the 260-week period, noting that no date of disablement was established during the decedent's lifetime, thus making the date of death the trigger for the waiting period, which fell after August 1, 1994. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to its interpretation that the date of death constitutes the date of disablement when no claim for benefits was made during the decedent’s life, leading to the 260-week waiting period.

SilicosisPneumoconiosisOccupational DiseaseWorkers' CompensationSpecial FundsReimbursementDate of DisablementDate of DeathWaiting PeriodAppellate Review
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 12,034 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