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. 534921
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 30, 2023

In the Matter of the Claim of Elizabeth Wilber

Claimant Elizabeth Wilber, a licensed practical nurse, sustained work-related injuries and was classified with a 70% permanent partial disability. Her employer, Hamister Group, LLC, and its carrier appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that affirmed her entitlement to ongoing indemnity benefits despite her rejection of a modified-duty employment offer. The carrier contended that Wilber's refusal constituted a voluntary removal from the labor market, precluding further benefits. However, the Board and subsequently the Appellate Division affirmed, citing Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (3) (w), which stipulates that claimants classified with a permanent partial disability are not required to demonstrate ongoing attachment to the labor market for continuing benefits. The court found no basis to disturb the Board's decision, affirming the award of benefits.

Permanent Partial DisabilityIndemnity BenefitsLabor Market AttachmentModified Duty EmploymentWorkers' Compensation LawAppellate ReviewClaimant RightsEmployer ObligationsBenefit SuspensionStatutory Interpretation
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Christopher

The court considered a petition by the Broome County Social Services Department for an extension of placement for the child Elizabeth. Elizabeth was placed in foster care following the death of her half-brother, for which her mother, Sally, was convicted of criminally negligent homicide. Despite the Department's placement of Elizabeth with her mother during the proceedings, the court found Sally lacked credibility, insight, and responsibility for her actions. Expert testimony from two clinical psychologists highlighted the high risk to Elizabeth in her mother's care due to the mother's personality issues and lack of accountability. The court granted the extension of placement for 12 months but ordered Elizabeth's removal from her mother's home, directing the Department to place her in an appropriate alternative setting while both parents receive necessary services.

Child WelfareFamily Court ActExtension of PlacementChild AbuseCriminally Negligent HomicideParental RightsBest Interests of the ChildPsychological EvaluationCredibility AssessmentParental Responsibility
References
1
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 03321 [42 NY3d 992]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2024

Matter of Elizabeth St. Garden, Inc. v. City of New York

This CPLR article 78 proceeding involved a challenge to a negative declaration issued by the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) concerning a proposed affordable housing development on a lot currently occupied by the Elizabeth Street Garden. Petitioners argued that HPD failed to adequately assess the environmental impacts, particularly regarding open space reduction and climate change, under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR). The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, upholding HPD's negative declaration. The Court found that HPD took a 'hard look' at relevant environmental concerns and provided a 'reasoned elaboration' for its determination that the project would not have a significant adverse environmental impact, despite the study area being underserved with open space.

Affordable HousingEnvironmental ReviewSEQRACEQRNegative DeclarationOpen SpaceClimate ChangeUrban DevelopmentNew York City LawCPLR Article 78
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Elizabeth G.

The case involves a petitioner alleging sexual abuse by Phoenix C. against two of Robin G.'s children (Megan and Patrick), and neglect of a third (Elizabeth), with Robin G. also accused of neglect for failing to protect her children. The Family Court initially dismissed the petition, deeming the children's out-of-court statements inconsistent and incredible. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, finding the children's statements to be consistent, credible, and sufficiently corroborated by a validation expert and cross-corroboration between siblings. The appellate court concluded that Phoenix C. sexually abused Megan and Patrick and neglected Elizabeth, and that Robin G. neglected all three children by failing to provide proper supervision. The matter was subsequently remitted to Jefferson County Family Court for a dispositional hearing before a different Judge, with the children's custody remaining with their father.

Child Sexual AbuseChild NeglectOut-of-court StatementsCorroborationValidation Expert TestimonySibling Cross-CorroborationAppellate ReviewCredibility DeterminationFamily Court ActPreponderance of Evidence
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 28, 2013

Torrance Construction, Inc. v. Jaques

Lawrence R. Jaques, the plaintiff's bookkeeper, allegedly stole at least $450,000 by making unauthorized personal purchases charged to the plaintiff's business accounts. His wife, Elizabeth W. Jaques (defendant), was accused of participating in the scheme by accepting the benefits of these purchases at their shared home. Plaintiff initiated an action alleging conversion, seeking title to the defendants' home, moneys had and received, breach of fiduciary duty with a constructive trust, and an accounting. The Supreme Court partially dismissed claims against Elizabeth W. Jaques and cancelled a notice of pendency. On cross-appeals, the higher court modified the lower court's order, reinstating some claims against both defendants, adjusting the application of the statute of limitations, and reinstating the notice of pendency. The final decision was to modify the order and, as so modified, affirm it.

ConversionBreach of Fiduciary DutyMoneys Had and ReceivedEquitable EstoppelStatute of LimitationsAiding and AbettingNotice of PendencyDismissal of ClaimsAppellate ReviewBookkeeper Misconduct
References
25
Case No. 5 N.Y.3d 486
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 27, 2005

Matter of Nyc Asbestos Litig

Elizabeth Holdampf, wife of Port Authority employee John Holdampf, alleged she contracted mesothelioma from asbestos dust brought home on her husband's work clothes, which she laundered. The New York Court of Appeals considered whether the Port Authority, as an employer and landowner, owed a duty of care to a non-employee spouse for secondhand asbestos exposure. Reversing the Appellate Division, the Court concluded that no such duty of care exists, emphasizing the reluctance to extend liability to an indeterminate class of persons and the absence of a direct relationship between the Port Authority and Elizabeth Holdampf.

Asbestos ExposureDuty of CareEmployer LiabilityLandowner DutyThird-Party InjuryMesotheliomaNegligenceWorkplace ToxinsHousehold ExposureAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ryen v. Terry (In Re Terry)

The trustee, Louis A. Ryen, initiated an adversary proceeding against debtor Elizabeth A. Terry to compel the turnover of a $51,000 workers' compensation settlement received post-petition for a pre-petition industrial accident. The debtor had attempted to exempt these funds improperly. The settlement proceeds were held in part as treasury bills by the debtor and in part by her mother, Bertha Terry, as a bailment. The court ruled that these funds constituted property of the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541(a) and were beneficial to the estate. Consequently, the court granted the trustee's request for immediate turnover of the funds.

BankruptcyTurnoverWorkers' CompensationPost-Petition SettlementProperty of the EstateDebtor's ExemptionsAdversary ProceedingBailmentTrustee's PowersFederal Bankruptcy Law
References
5
Case No. ADJ7039184
Regular
Sep 16, 2014

Elizabeth Evans vs. AT & T INTERNET SERVICES

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by AT&T Internet Services in a workers' compensation claim brought by Elizabeth Evans. The petitioner, AT&T, has formally withdrawn its petition. Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has issued an order dismissing the petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalWithdrawnWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSelf-insuredClaims ManagementSan Francisco District OfficeADJ7039184Order DismissingApplicant
References
0
Case No. POM 0294611
Regular
Oct 12, 2007

ELIZABETH VILLANUEVA vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Elizabeth Villanueva's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision. The ALJ found Villanueva lacked credibility due to contradictory testimony regarding her claimed back injury and its reporting. The Board adopted the ALJ's reasoning, giving great weight to their credibility determination.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Credibility FindingSkeletal PetitionTitle 8 CCR 10846Proof of ServiceCCR Rule 10850Impeachment
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McCluskey v. West Bradford Corp.

Plaintiff Elizabeth McCluskey sustained an injury to her toe from a piece of metal embedded in a tile floor shortly after her employer moved into a new building. She initiated a negligence action against the landowner, building owner, general contractor, and the tile subcontractor, but a jury returned a verdict of no cause for action. On appeal, plaintiff asserted multiple errors, including the denial of requested jury charges on circumstantial evidence, adverse inference, constructive notice, res ipsa loquitur, and foreseeability, as well as a remark by opposing counsel and the court's refusal to grant a directed verdict. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgments, finding no significant errors in the jury instructions, that the summation remark was harmless, and that the denial of a directed verdict was proper given the evidence. The court also noted that res ipsa loquitur was not applicable due to the lack of exclusive control by defendants over the area of injury.

NegligencePremises LiabilityTile Floor InjuryCircumstantial EvidenceRes Ipsa LoquiturJury InstructionsDirected VerdictAppellate ReviewConstructive NoticeSummation Error
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 135 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