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. 2020 NY Slip Op 01140
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2020

Boody v. El Sol Contr. & Constr. Corp.

Robert Boody, a construction worker for subcontractor Caribe Construction Co., sustained injuries while working on a bridge repair project for general contractor El Sol Contracting and Construction Corporation in Queens. The incident occurred as Boody attempted to move between two barges, alleging his leg was pinned by a tightening mooring line. Boody initiated a personal injury action against El Sol, asserting violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6), claims which the Supreme Court initially declined to dismiss. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the lower court's decision, granting El Sol's motion for summary judgment. The appellate court concluded that El Sol had established the accident resulted from the method of work, not a dangerous premises condition, and that El Sol lacked supervisory control over the work, thereby dismissing the Labor Law claims against them.

Construction accidentLabor Lawsummary judgmentpremises liabilitysupervisory controlsubcontractorgeneral contractorappellate decisionpersonal injuryworkplace safety
References
9
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 03108 [238 AD3d 1393]
Regular Panel Decision
May 22, 2025

Matter of Solomon-El (Commissioner of Labor)

Claimant Norma Solomon-El was terminated from her employment as a direct care healthcare worker after failing to comply with a COVID-19 vaccine mandate, having had her request for a religious exemption denied. She was subsequently disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits by the Department of Labor, a decision upheld by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. Although the Board's initial July 29, 2022 decision was later rescinded and replaced by a December 5, 2023 decision (which again upheld the disqualification, finding no sincerely held religious beliefs), Solomon-El's appeal was solely from the July 2022 decision. The Appellate Division, Third Department, dismissed her appeal as moot due to the rescinded decision and because she abandoned any challenge to the superseding December 2023 decision by failing to file an updated brief. The court also noted that, even on the merits, substantial evidence would support the Board's December 2023 determination.

Unemployment InsuranceVoluntary SeparationGood CauseCOVID-19 Vaccine MandateReligious ExemptionAppeal Board DecisionMoot AppealAbandoned AppealSubstantial EvidenceAppellate Division
References
7
Case No. ADJ7231557
Regular
Jun 19, 2014

LUCAS PATTIE vs. EL SOL WINERY, HAL LISKE

This case involves a withdrawn petition for removal or reconsideration filed by the applicant, Lucas Pattie, with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The Board's order dismisses this petition as it has been voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner. The original decision being appealed was issued on April 16, 2014. The dismissal order was dated and filed on June 19, 2014.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWithdrawn PetitionDismissal OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ7231557Santa Ana District OfficeApplicantDefendantEL SOL WINERY
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 03, 2005

Roberts v. El-Hajal

Plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice lawsuit, alleging that defendant Marlene El-Hajal negligently failed to diagnose a rare seizure disorder in her infant son. The complaint also sought to hold defendant E.J. Noble Hospital vicariously liable for El-Hajal's actions. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to the hospital, concluding that El-Hajal was an independent contractor and the hospital lacked legal authority to supervise her medical practice. Plaintiff appealed this decision, additionally asserting that a hospital-employed nurse, Joy Markwick, was negligent for not recording and reporting telephone calls. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, finding no evidence of an employer-employee relationship between the hospital and El-Hajal during the relevant period, and dismissing the claims against the nurse due to insufficient evidence.

Medical MalpracticeVicarious LiabilityIndependent ContractorSummary JudgmentHospital LiabilityPhysician NegligenceNurse NegligenceSeizure DisorderEmployer-Employee RelationshipAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 02615 [138 AD3d 682]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 06, 2016

Federico v. Defoe Corp.

The injured plaintiff, Nicholas Federico, a laborer for El Sol Contracting, was struck by a vehicle while performing lane closures on the Gowanus Expressway. He and his wife sued Defoe Corp., another contractor on the project, alleging common-law negligence for prematurely removing its lane closures which El Sol had "piggybacked" on. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, granted Defoe Corp.'s motion for summary judgment, determining that Defoe owed no duty of care to Federico under the Espinal exceptions and that its conduct was not a proximate cause of the accident. Upon reargument, the court adhered to its original determination. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, dismissing the negligence cause of action against Defoe Corp.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentNegligenceSummary JudgmentDuty of CareProximate CauseContractual ObligationThird-Party LiabilityAppellate ReviewLaborer
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re V. R. P-L.

The petitioners sought certification as qualified adoptive parents for M.EL. under Domestic Relations Law § 115-d, aiming to satisfy USCIS home study requirements for an I-600 petition. The USCIS had previously rejected their independent social worker's home study and suggested either an authorized agency home study or a DRL § 115-d certification. The court, however, determined that DRL § 115-d was inappropriate for foreign-born children sought for adoption as orphans, and that such cases fall under DRL § 115-a. Despite the USCIS's guidance and the petitioners' time constraints, the court was compelled by state law to dismiss the petition due to its reliance on the incorrect statutory section.

AdoptionPrivate Placement AdoptionForeign AdoptionOrphanUSCISI-600 PetitionHome StudyDomestic Relations LawNew York Family CourtStatutory Construction
References
8
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 07119 [144 AD3d 407]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 01, 2016

Antoniak v. P.S. Marcato El. Co., Inc.

The Appellate Division, First Department, modified an order from the Supreme Court, New York County, concerning a personal injury case involving Ryszard Antoniak against P.S. Marcato Elevator Co., Inc. and 371 Seventh Avenue Co., LLC. Defendant 371 Seventh Avenue Co., LLC had moved for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint and cross claims, and for contractual indemnification against P.S. Marcato Elevator Co., Inc. The lower court denied this motion. The Appellate Division found that 371 had demonstrated prima facie that it was the plaintiff's employer and that the contractual indemnity provision between 371 and PS Marcato was triggered. Consequently, the appellate court dismissed the complaint and all cross claims against 371 and granted 371 conditional contractual indemnification against PS Marcato, while otherwise affirming the original order. The indemnification was conditional because 371 did not conclusively prove it was entirely free from negligence.

Summary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationEmployer-Employee RelationshipElevator AccidentAppellate ReviewPrima Facie ShowingNegligenceCorporate StructureTrade NameIndemnity Provision
References
5
Case No. ADJ1544610 (MON 0209957)
Regular
May 11, 2012

HILDA RUIZ-GUZMAN vs. EL POLLO LOCO; SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

This case involves a dispute over the adequacy of a proposed Compromise and Release (C&R) settlement for a worker with extensive injuries. The WCJ initially found the C&R inadequate, leading to Petitions for Reconsideration from both the applicant and defendant. The Appeals Board has scheduled a Commissioners' Conference to discuss the C&R, including the annuity rate, cost-of-living adjustments for future payments, the identity of the liable insurer, and the reasonableness of the proposed attorney fee, which appears to exceed statutory guidelines. The applicant's attorney must justify the $1.7 million fee based on specific factors.

Compromise and ReleaseStructured SettlementPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical TreatmentAttorney FeeAnnuityCost of Living AdjustmentExcess Carrier
References
1
Case No. VNO 0297831
Regular
Jul 08, 2008

ANTONIE TUR vs. EL POLLO LOCO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted reconsideration of the judge's prior decision in the case of *Antonie Tur vs. El Pollo Loco*. The WCAB rescinded the judge's decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision. This action is not a final determination of the case's merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration GrantedDecision RescindedFurther ProceedingsWCJ DecisionEl Pollo LocoPermissibly Self-InsuredVNO 0297831Antonie TurAntonine Tur
References
0
Case No. ADJ7711113
Regular
Apr 04, 2012

Lilia Orozco vs. EL POLLO LOCO

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, ADJ7711113, involved applicant Lilia Orozco seeking benefits from El Pollo Loco. Orozco claimed injury to her musculoskeletal system, psyche, and other areas. The Board denied Orozco's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) decision. The WCJ found insufficient evidence that Orozco sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment prior to her termination for misconduct. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, which were crucial in denying the reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Lilia OrozcoEl Pollo LocoESISMusculoskeletalPsycheInternal
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 120 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