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. CAF 10-00834
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 2011

Y., BRIDGET KATHLEEN, MTR. OF

This case is an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Chautauqua County, which found four children (Bridget Y., Kelly Y., Colleen Y., and Michaela Y.) to be neglected and placed them into the custody of the Chautauqua County Department of Social Services (DSS). The parents, Kenneth M.Y. and Rita S., appealed, challenging the Family Court's subject matter jurisdiction, asserting New Mexico as the children's home state with a pending custody proceeding. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's exercise of temporary emergency jurisdiction, citing the children's imminent risk of harm due to severe abuse and neglect allegations and New Mexico's insufficient protective measures. The appeal was dismissed as moot for Colleen Y. and Kelly Y., who attained the age of 18 during the appeal's pendency.

Child NeglectChild AbuseTemporary Emergency JurisdictionUCCJEAFamily LawAppellate ReviewJurisdictional ConflictParental RightsHome StateInter-State Custody
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

S.Y. v. New York City Department of Education

Plaintiffs, parents of R.Y., sued the New York City Department of Education (DOE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), challenging a State Review Officer's (SRO) decision that reversed an Impartial Hearing Officer's (IHO) finding. The IHO had ruled that the DOE failed to provide R.Y. a free appropriate public education (FAPE) and ordered tuition reimbursement for R.Y.'s private school, the Rebecca School. The District Court found multiple procedural violations by the DOE that cumulatively denied R.Y. a FAPE. The Court also affirmed the IHO's findings that the Rebecca School was an appropriate placement and that the equities favored the Parents. Consequently, Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was GRANTED, and the DOE's cross-motion was DENIED, entitling Plaintiffs to tuition reimbursement and attorneys' fees.

IDEAFAPEIEPDue ProcessTuition ReimbursementSpecial Education LawProcedural AdequacyParental RightsAutism Spectrum DisorderAdministrative Review
References
38
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Rebecca X.

This case involves appeals from six Family Court orders that adjudicated Rebecca X., Carissa Y., and Brittany Y. as abused and/or neglected children. Brittany Y. accused the respondent (her mother's boyfriend) of sexual abuse, which was corroborated by medical examinations and social worker assessments despite attempts by her mother and the respondent to influence her statements. The Family Court found clear and convincing evidence of sexual abuse and derivative neglect for her sisters. The respondent was deemed a legally responsible person due to his cohabitation and disciplinary role. The appellate court affirmed all orders, concluding that Brittany's out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated, the respondent was properly identified as legally responsible, and the findings of derivative neglect were amply supported. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were also rejected.

Sexual abuseChild neglectCorroborated testimonyDerivative findingsParental dutyMedical evidenceWitness intimidationFamily Court proceedingsAppellant rightsAbuse adjudication
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Jose Y.

The petitioner, Dutchess County Department of Social Services, appealed an order from the Family Court, Dutchess County, which had dismissed child abuse and neglect petitions and returned the children to the respondent's custody. The appellate court modified the order, reversing the dismissal of neglect allegations concerning Jose Y., Eduardo Y., and Geraldo Y., and found that the respondent had neglected the children. The court determined that the respondent failed to recognize and act upon clear signs of sexual abuse endured by Eduardo over two years. The matter was remitted to the Family Court for a dispositional hearing, with custody of Eduardo Y. and Geraldo Y. remaining with the appellant, and updated psychological evaluations ordered for all parties involved.

Child NeglectChild AbuseFamily Court Act Article 10Parental SupervisionSexual Abuse VictimsAppellate ReviewDispositional HearingPsychological EvaluationRemittal to Family CourtChild Custody
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Hime Y.

This appeal concerns the termination of a natural mother's parental rights to her children, Suzanne and Hime, focusing on the ground of 'mental illness.' Previously, the case involving Suzanne was remanded due to an erroneous 'no-fault' theory, and a separate proceeding for Hime had dismissed termination, granting custody to foster parents with visitation rights for the mother. The appellate court now scrutinizes the record for the first time regarding the 'mentally ill' contention, considering medical reports, caseworker testimonies, and drawing an unfavorable inference from the mother's failure to present her own psychiatric evidence. The court found 'clear and convincing' proof that the mother suffered from a residual form of schizophrenia, preventing her from properly caring for Hime and putting the child in danger of neglect. Consequently, the Family Court's order dismissing causes relating to Hime was modified; the petition to terminate parental rights based on mental illness was granted, the mother's visitation privileges were vacated, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings.

Parental Rights TerminationMental IllnessSchizophreniaChild NeglectAppellate ReviewFamily Court ActSocial Services LawVisitation RightsFoster CarePsychiatric Evaluation
References
5
Case No. KA 12-00137
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 08, 2014

FIGUEROA-NORSE, ZORAIDA Y., PEOPLE v

Defendant Zoraida Y. Figueroa-Norse appealed a judgment convicting her of assault in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child, stemming from severe, life-threatening injuries inflicted upon her eight-year-old foster child. The victim suffered head and abdominal trauma requiring surgery and resulting in paralysis. Figueroa-Norse challenged the voluntariness of statements made to law enforcement, arguing a lack of Miranda warnings, but the court found she was not in custody. She also raised issues concerning jury selection and the legal sufficiency and weight of the evidence. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the conviction, finding her contentions either unpreserved for review or lacking in merit.

Assault Second DegreeEndangering Welfare of ChildFoster Child AbuseCriminal InterrogationMiranda RightsVoluntary StatementsJury Selection ProcessSufficiency of EvidenceWeight of Evidence ReviewHarmless Error Doctrine
References
20
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 07207 [165 AD3d 1506]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 25, 2018

Matter of Keadden W. (Hope Y.)

This case involves an appeal concerning the termination of Hope Y.'s parental rights over her three children, including Keadden W., following a finding of permanent neglect. The Albany County Department for Children, Youth and Families initiated the proceeding, leading to Family Court orders in August 2015 and May 2016 which adjudicated permanent neglect and terminated parental rights, respectively. The Appellate Division, Third Department, dismissed the appeal from the initial fact-finding order but affirmed the dispositional order. The court found that the petitioner made diligent efforts to strengthen the mother-child relationship and that the mother failed to develop a realistic plan for her children's future. The decision also highlighted the mother's struggles with mental health, unstable housing, substance abuse, and poor parenting skills, concluding that termination was in the children's best interests.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectChild WelfareFamily Court ActSocial Services LawAppellate ReviewDiligent EffortsBest Interests of the ChildInadequate ParentingReunification Services
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Nichols v. C.N.Y. Bottle Co.

The case involves an appeal regarding a fatal heart attack suffered by a C.N.Y. Bottle Company employee during work. The employee's widow filed for death benefits, which were initially awarded by a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending the death was not causally related to employment and that the claimant was not a legal widow. The court found substantial evidence to support the Board's finding of a causally related accident, citing expert medical evidence. It also ruled that the claimant had established her status as the decedent's widow, as the employer and carrier failed to provide evidence of abandonment. The Board's decision was affirmed, with costs awarded to the Workers’ Compensation Board.

Heart AttackAccidental InjuryCausal RelationDeath BenefitsWidow StatusWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceBurden of ProofEmployment-Related Injury
References
3
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05781, No. 68
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 21, 2025

Matter of K.Y.Z. (W.Z.)

The case concerns the termination of W.Z.'s parental rights over his child, K.Y.Z., on grounds of permanent neglect, initiated by Good Shepherd Services and the New York City Administration for Children's Services. The father, a Fuzhou-speaking Chinese immigrant, appealed the lower courts' findings that the agency made diligent efforts towards reunification. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that the agency failed to meet its burden of proving diligent efforts. Specifically, the court found inadequate accommodation of the father's language barrier during crucial interactions and insufficient provision of services to address his understanding of the mother's mental health and his employment challenges, thereby dismissing the termination petition.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectChild Welfare AgencyLinguistic AccommodationFuzhou DialectInterpreter ServicesFamily ReunificationSocial ServicesJudicial ReviewClear and Convincing Standard
References
18
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02722 [238 AD3d 451]
Regular Panel Decision
May 06, 2025

Guayara v. H.P.S.O.N.Y., Inc.

The plaintiff, Luis Guayara, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, New York County, which denied his motion to declare TJC LDK CLR FS & DTF, LLC (TJC) as his employer for litigation purposes. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed this denial. The court ruled that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the defendant, H.P.S.O.N.Y., Inc., was a party to or in privity with the Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) proceeding that had determined TJC to be the employer. Consequently, that WCB determination lacked collateral estoppel effect against the defendant. The decision also noted that new evidence, specifically the deposition testimony of defendant's general manager, which was submitted for the first time in reply, could not be considered in support of the plaintiff's prima facie showing.

Collateral EstoppelEmployer-Employee RelationshipWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate ProcedureEvidentiary RulesPrivityDenial of MotionMotion PracticeJudiciary LawWorkers' Compensation Law
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 520 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