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

People v. Ackerson

In a felony driving while intoxicated trial, defendant Scott Ackerson moved to preclude the testimony of an emergency medical technician (EMT), Diane Wood, citing the physician-patient privilege under CPLR 4504(a). The court denied the motion, stating that evidentiary privileges, being in derogation of common law, must be strictly construed. The Legislature has not explicitly extended this privilege to EMTs, despite creating other specific privileges. The court found no evidence that the EMT acted as an agent for a physician. The opinion emphasized that an EMT's role is to stabilize patients, distinct from a physician's role of diagnosis and treatment, thus not falling within the purpose of the CPLR 4504 privilege.

PrivilegeEmergency Medical TechnicianEMTPhysician-Patient PrivilegeCPLR 4504Statutory InterpretationEvidentiary PrivilegeFelony DWITestimony PreclusionAgency
References
6
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 23283
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 15, 2023

Jackson v. Citywide Mobile Response Corp.

Tray Jackson, an emergency medical technician (EMT), initiated a class action lawsuit against Citywide Mobile Response Corp., alleging multiple violations of the New York State Labor Law and NYCRR. Jackson claimed that the defendant failed to provide full wages, including overtime and spread of hours pay, and illegally deducted costs for mandatory uniforms and supplies from employee pay, resulting in wages below the minimum wage. The plaintiff sought class certification for a proposed class of approximately 200 current and former EMTs, paramedics, and drivers. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, presided over by Justice Fidel E. Gomez, granted the motion for class certification, finding that all statutory requirements under CPLR 901 and 902 were satisfied. The court certified a class comprising all individuals working for the defendant as drivers, EMTs, or paramedics in New York between December 30, 2015, and August 15, 2022.

Class Action CertificationLabor Law ViolationsUnpaid WagesOvertime PayUniform ReimbursementMinimum WageSpread of Hours PayWage NoticesIllegal Wage DeductionsEMT
References
31
Case No. 01-22-00071-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 08, 2022

City of Houston v. Martha Vogel and Maria Escalante

This is an interlocutory appeal by the City of Houston challenging the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in a negligence suit filed by Martha Vogel and Maria Escalante. The appellees alleged negligence following a traffic accident with a City of Houston Fire Department ambulance driven by EMT J. Brooks, seeking over $2,500,000 in personal-injury damages. The City asserted governmental immunity, arguing that its employee, EMT Brooks, was entitled to official immunity and that the Texas Tort Claims Act's (TTCA) 'Emergency Exception' and '9-1-1 Emergency Service' exception applied. The Court of Appeals reviewed the trial court's ruling de novo, taking into consideration the jurisdictional evidence presented by both parties. The court ultimately found that the City conclusively established that it retained its governmental immunity under the '9-1-1 Emergency Service' exception to the TTCA because Vogel and Escalante failed to present evidence raising a genuine issue of material fact as to a violation of the law by EMT Brooks or reckless disregard. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s order and rendered judgment dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction.

Governmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActPlea to JurisdictionEmergency Exception9-1-1 Emergency Service ExceptionOfficial ImmunityReckless DisregardMotor Vehicle AccidentAmbulance CollisionTraffic Accident
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2011

Pettit v. Scipio Volunteer Fire District

Claimant, a volunteer firefighter and EMT for the Scipio Volunteer Fire District, sustained multiple injuries, including a traumatic brain injury, in a one-car accident while returning home after receiving a swine flu vaccination. The Workers' Compensation Board determined that her injuries were incurred in the course of her duties as a volunteer firefighter, awarding her benefits. The District and its workers' compensation carrier appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's determination, finding that the District strongly encouraged EMTs to receive the vaccination and facilitated its provision, making the activity compensable under Volunteer Firefighters’ Benefit Law § 5 (1) (p) as participation in a program to maintain performance of duties.

Volunteer FirefighterEMTSwine Flu VaccineLine of DutyCar AccidentTraumatic Brain InjuryCompensabilityStatutory ConstructionBenefit LawScipio Volunteer Fire District
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Pinti

This case concerns an appeal from a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which reversed a referee's decision and determined that emergency medical technicians (EMTs) working for an ambulance service employer were employees, not independent contractors, thus assessing the employer contributions. The central question for review was whether substantial evidence supported the board's conclusion regarding the employer-employee relationship. The court examined the record, noting factors such as EMTs' scheduling, payment structure, lack of business investment, and the employer's provision of liability and workers' compensation insurance. Despite some factors that could support a contrary finding, the court concluded that the board's determination was supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was affirmed without costs.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent Contractor StatusEmergency Medical TechniciansSubstantial Evidence ReviewAppellate ReviewLabor Law ContributionsAmbulance Service IndustryWorkers' Compensation InsuranceBoard Decision Affirmation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Bueno

Chief Judge Lippman dissents from the majority's decision, arguing that they misinterpreted Penal Law § 120.05 (3) regarding assault in the second degree. The dissent contends that the majority incorrectly focuses on the victim's activity rather than the defendant's specific intent to prevent an emergency medical technician (EMT) from performing a lawful duty. Lippman asserts that while intent to injure may have been present, the evidence was insufficient to prove the higher standard of specific intent required by the statute to interfere with the EMT's duties. The dissent also criticizes the majority's application of *People v Steinberg* to infer intent solely from the outcome of the act, stating that surrounding circumstances must also be considered. Concluding that the rule announced by the majority conflicts with the plain meaning of the statute, Chief Judge Lippman would reverse the Appellate Division's order.

AssaultSecond Degree AssaultPenal LawSpecific IntentLawful DutyEmergency Medical TechnicianEMTIntent to PreventPhysical InjuryCriminal Law
References
2
Case No. 16,680; 78-CI-18460
Regular Panel Decision

City of San Antonio v. Aguilar

This case addresses an appeal concerning a municipal labor contract dispute, where Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) of the San Antonio Fire Department sought overtime back pay. The central legal question involved the applicability and interpretation of the State Civil Service Act, specifically regarding the standard work week for fire department employees whose duties do not include firefighting. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, which had awarded overtime compensation to the EMTs for a period from November 1974 to July 1977. The decision heavily relied on the doctrine of stare decisis, citing the precedent set by the companion case of Kierstead v. City of San Antonio. The court dismissed the City's arguments regarding the doctrine of ejusdem generis and the method of overtime calculation, affirming that these issues were consistent with prior judicial interpretations.

Municipal EmploymentOvertime CompensationPublic Safety PersonnelStatutory InterpretationPreclusion DoctrinesStare DecisisRes JudicataCollateral EstoppelCollective Bargaining AgreementsCivil Service Law
References
18
Case No. ADJ9193432
Regular
Mar 06, 2017

RICARDO HERNANDEZ vs. COSMA EMTE, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board reconsidered a decision denying applicant's requests for home health care, a motorized scooter, and an orthopedic bed. While affirming the denial of the scooter and bed due to insufficient medical reasoning, the Board deferred the home health care issue. This was to allow further development of the record considering specific prescription requirements for home health care under Labor Code section 4600(h) and relevant case law, as the prior utilization review denial was untimely. The applicant was awarded further medical treatment in the form of a psychiatric consult.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLabor Code Section 4610Utilization ReviewPrimary Treating PhysicianHome Health CareMotorized ScooterOrthopedic Bed and MattressPsychiatric Consultation
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Roberts v. New York City Office of Collective Bargaining

This case concerns an appeal regarding the New York City Fire Department's "zero tolerance" policy, which mandates automatic termination for EMS employees who fail or refuse drug tests. Unions representing these employees argued that this policy should be subject to mandatory collective bargaining. The New York City Board of Collective Bargaining and a lower court ruled against the unions, asserting that the policy falls under management's disciplinary rights. The appellate court affirmed this decision, holding that disciplinary actions for EMS personnel are the sole province of the Fire Commissioner under the New York City Charter, and that deterring illegal drug use by EMS workers is critical to public safety and the FDNY's core mission.

Public SafetyEmergency Medical Services (EMS)Drug Testing PolicyZero ToleranceCollective BargainingMandatory BargainingNew York City Fire Department (FDNY)Fire CommissionerDisciplinary AuthorityNew York City Charter
References
12
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 06853
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 19, 2020

Fornabaio v. Beacon Broadway Co., LLC

Plaintiff Anthony Fornabaio, while attending a concert at a venue owned by Beacon Broadway Company, LLC, experienced a medical incident and refused assistance from Transcare EMTs. He subsequently fell and was injured. The Supreme Court denied summary judgment for Beacon and Transcare but granted Beacon's cross-claims against Sports & Entertainment Physicians, P.C. (SEP) for indemnification and breach of contract for failing to procure insurance. The Appellate Division modified this order, granting Beacon's and Transcare's motions to dismiss the complaint, reasoning that their duty to assist terminated when Fornabaio refused help. The court affirmed SEP's liability to Beacon, noting SEP's cross-claim against Transcare for indemnification was not moot.

Summary JudgmentPersonal InjuryNegligenceConcert VenueEMT ServicesRefusal of Medical AssistanceContractual IndemnificationBreach of ContractFailure to Procure InsuranceAppellate Review
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 23 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