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. ADJ14904382
Regular
Apr 16, 2025

MARIA MORFIN vs. BODEGA LATINA CORPORATION DBA EL SUPER MARKET, SAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) considered and denied Maria Morfin's Petition for Removal against Bodega Latina Corporation DBA El Super Market and Safety National Insurance Company. The Board emphasized that removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely granted, requiring substantial prejudice or irreparable harm and inadequacy of reconsideration as a remedy. The WCAB was not persuaded by the petitioner's arguments. Subsequently, the Board issued an order to correct a clerical error in the initial decision, specifically the omission of the service date, which was corrected to April 11, 2025.

Petition for RemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationClerical ErrorDate of ServiceWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportExtraordinary RemedyDenying Removal
References
4
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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Colonial Super Markets, Inc. v. Liss

Plaintiffs (Colonial Super Markets, Hy-Co Supermarkets, Marcaro, Inc.), three separate retail food stores affiliated as "Bells," sued defendant labor unions (Teamsters Local 558 and Food Store Employees 34) and their officers for a permanent injunction against picketing and for money damages. The plaintiffs moved for injunctive relief pendente lite. The unions began picketing plaintiffs' stores, claiming employees were non-union. Subsequently, Retail Clerks Local No. 212 organized plaintiffs' employees, and plaintiffs signed a recognition agreement with Local No. 212. Despite this, Teamsters Local No. 558 continued picketing, and Local No. 34 later rejoined. Plaintiffs argued the picketing's unlawful objective was to coerce them into recognizing the defendant unions and breach their contract with Local No. 212, constituting interference with contractual relations. Defendants asserted lawful organizational picketing and that the dispute fell under the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board. The court concluded that the picketing's real purpose was unlawful coercion and to induce contract breach, thus not constituting a "labor dispute" under Civil Practice Act section 876-a. The court also found its jurisdiction not preempted by federal statutes since the activities were not unfair labor practices under federal law. Consequently, the court denied defendants' motions and granted plaintiffs' motions for injunctive relief, with a termination proviso on November 1, 1957.

InjunctionPicketingLabor DisputeUnlawful Labor ObjectiveCollective BargainingRecognition AgreementJurisdictional DisputeContractual InterferenceState Court JurisdictionPreemption Doctrine
References
15
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. 2025 NY Slip Op 06274
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2025

DaSilva v. Super P57, LLC

The Appellate Division, First Department, modified a Supreme Court order regarding a Labor Law claim. Plaintiff Ivoir DaSilva was injured after falling from an unsecured plank, found to be 1.5 feet above an awning, due to an improperly designed fall prevention system lacking adequate tie-off points. The court rejected defendants' argument that DaSilva was the sole proximate cause, finding no evidence for a recalcitrant worker defense and the scissor lift argument unpreserved. Consequently, the court affirmed DaSilva's entitlement to partial summary judgment under Labor Law § 240 (1), deeming claims under Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6) academic.

Workplace SafetyElevation HazardLabor Law § 240(1)Summary JudgmentProximate CauseRecalcitrant Worker DefenseFall PreventionSafety DevicesConstruction AccidentAppellate Review
References
6
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. ADJ7399743
Regular
Jun 28, 2012

SYLVIA RODRIGUEZ vs. EL SUPER BODEGA LATINA, PACIFIC COMP CLAIM

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration that was dismissed as untimely. The petition was filed on April 30, 2012, which was beyond the 20-day statutory period plus 5 days for mailing after the March 22, 2012, Findings and Order. Furthermore, the petition lacked the required verification under Labor Code section 5902. The WCJ also noted the lien claimants failed to serve evidence on the defendant. Consequently, the Board dismissed the petition for these procedural defects.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Code of Civil Procedure Section 1013Verification RequirementLabor Code Section 5902Lien ClaimantsExclusion of EvidenceFailure to ServePermanent and Stationary Status
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 119 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