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. 2024 NYSlipOp 01535
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 20, 2024

Fuentes v. 257 Toppings Path, LLC

The injured plaintiff, Gregorio Fuentes, was working as a laborer on a new house construction when he fell 16 feet through an unguarded opening in the attic floor while spray-painting insulation. He and his wife sued the property owner, 257 Toppings Path, LLC, and the general contractor, A-H Construction, LLC, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability was initially denied by the Supreme Court. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the lower court's order and granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on both Labor Law claims, finding that the defendants failed to provide proper safety devices for an elevation-related hazard and violated Industrial Code provision 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (b) (1) (i). The Court emphasized that comparative negligence is not a defense to these specific Labor Law violations.

Construction accidentFall from heightLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Industrial CodeSummary judgmentLiabilityElevation-related hazardUnguarded openingComparative negligence
References
16
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 06792 [131 AD3d 1025]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 16, 2015

Moreira v. Osvaldo J. Ponzo

The plaintiff, Efrain Fuentes Moreira, fell from the roof of the defendant's investment property while removing a large tree that had fallen on the house during Hurricane Irene, causing structural damage. Moreira subsequently commenced an action against the defendant, Osvaldo J. Ponzo, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that tree cutting is not an activity covered by these statutes. The Supreme Court denied the defendant's motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that while tree removal itself is generally not covered, it is protected under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) when it is an ancillary duty performed during the repair of a building or structure.

Personal InjuryLabor LawSummary JudgmentTree RemovalRoof AccidentStructural RepairStatutory InterpretationConstruction WorkAncillary DutiesAppellate Division
References
16
Case No. ADJ8534657
Regular
Dec 24, 2015

RAMON FUENTES vs. DE ANZA COUNTRY CLUB, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Ramon Fuentes' petition for reconsideration because it was not filed from a "final" order that determined substantive rights or liabilities. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm that would justify this extraordinary remedy. The WCJ's report, which was adopted by the WCAB, stated the decision only addressed an intermediate procedural issue. Therefore, reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if a final adverse decision issues later.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityThreshold IssueInterlocutory ProceduralEvidentiary IssueExtraordinary Remedy
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cruz v. LYN-ROG INC.

Plaintiffs, a group of car laborers, initiated a collective action against Lyn-Rog Inc. d/b/a The Ultimate Car Wash and Roger Lenza, seeking unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York State Labor Law. They moved for conditional certification of the collective action, requesting disclosure of potential class members' contact information and authorization to distribute a notice. Defendants opposed, citing individual defenses and arguing the employees were not 'similarly situated.' The U.S. Magistrate Judge, A. Kathleen Tomlinson, granted the plaintiffs' motion, finding they met the lenient standard for conditional certification by demonstrating a common policy violating labor laws. The court also ordered the defendants to produce contact information for employees dating back six years, aligning with state law claims for judicial economy, and approved the proposed notice.

FLSAOvertime PayCollective ActionConditional CertificationUnpaid WagesLabor LawNew York State Labor LawCar Wash IndustryWage and HourClass Action
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. Avon Associates, Inc.

This case addresses a motion by defendants mortgagors to vacate an ex parte order appointing a receiver during a mortgage foreclosure action. Defendants asserted that the lack of notice for the receiver's appointment violated CPLR 6401 and their Federal constitutional due process rights, citing Fuentes v Shevin. The court found that New York's Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law § 1325 (subd 1) permits ex parte receiver appointments when the mortgage contract explicitly waives notice. Furthermore, the court distinguished the present case from Fuentes, concluding that the sophisticated business operators involved had knowingly and voluntarily waived their right to notice, akin to the circumstances in Overmyer Co. v Frick Co. Based on these findings, the court affirmed the validity of the ex parte order and denied the defendants' motion to vacate the appointment of the receiver.

Mortgage ForeclosureReceiver AppointmentEx Parte OrderDue ProcessWaiver of NoticeContractual WaiverCPLRReal Property Actions and Proceedings LawConstitutional LawBusiness Disputes
References
9
Case No. ADJ7124599
Regular
Apr 30, 2013

FUENTES vs. CEDARLANE NATURAL, LIBERTY MUTUAL

This case concerns a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a dismissed lien. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the Judge's reasoning that the lien claimant failed to provide proof of timely payment of the lien activation fee. The Judge noted that the claimant did not present a receipt showing timely payment even when given an extended opportunity. Furthermore, the claimant failed to attach proof of timely payment of the lien activation fee to their petition, a requirement for reconsideration.

ADJ7124599Petition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantWCJ OpinionReport and RecommendationFigueroa v. B.C. Doering Co.Lien Activation FeeDismissalLien ConferenceMinutes of Hearing
References
1
Case No. ADJ8240769, ADJ8240772, ADJ7151876
Regular
Oct 14, 2014

Eugenia Fuentes vs. BAKERSFIELD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the applicant's entitlement to a 15% increase in permanent disability for the defendant's failure to offer suitable work within 60 days of her reaching permanent and stationary status. The Board amended the award to correct a calculation error in the permanent disability rating from 19% to 18%, proportionally reducing the attorney's fees. The Board also ordered the defendant to withhold attorney fees pending a resolution between the applicant's current and prior counsel. The applicant's claim for psychological cumulative trauma injury was denied as it was caused by lawful personnel actions.

WCABReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityLabor Code Section 4658(d)Work OfferPermanent and StationaryAgreed Medical ExaminerCumulative TraumaGood Faith Personnel ActionsAttorney Fees
References
6
Case No. ADJ2640386
Regular
Nov 02, 2009

GRACIELA FUENTES vs. BCBG, CNA CASUALTY OF CALIFORNIA

The WCAB denied applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision that applicant did not sustain an industrial injury in the form of fibromyalgia. The WCJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryUpper ExtremitiesNeckPsycheFibromyalgiaChronic Pain SyndromeAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)RheumatologistOrthopedics
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fuentes v. City of New York Human Resources Administration

This employment discrimination case involves a Special Security Officer of the New York City Human Resources Administration (the agency) who claims he was denied promotion due to Hispanic national origin under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The plaintiff alleged non-promotion in 1986 and 1987. The agency moved for summary judgment, asserting the claims were time-barred and lacked merit. The court granted the agency's motion to dismiss claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and monetary relief claims under Title VII as time-barred. However, the court denied summary judgment for the surviving portion of the plaintiff's case, which pertains to injunctive relief and attorney's fees.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VII42 U.S.C. § 1981Promotion DenialNational Origin DiscriminationHispanicTime-Barred ClaimsSummary JudgmentInjunctive ReliefAttorney's Fees
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Fuentes v. New York City Housing Authority

This case concerns an appeal by the Special Fund for Reopened Cases from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision dated November 15, 2006. The Board had transferred liability for a claimant's 1998 work-related back injury to the Special Fund, pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. The Special Fund argued that certain payments made to the claimant in late 2005, between November 30 and December 17, were advance payments of compensation, which would preclude the transfer of liability. However, the Board found that these payments were charged to the claimant's accumulated sick leave and did not constitute advance payments of compensation. The court affirmed the Board's finding, concluding that the sick leave payments did not prevent the transfer of liability to the Special Fund because they were not made voluntarily in recognition of employer liability, and thus, the criteria for transferring liability to the Special Fund were met.

Special Fund for Reopened CasesWorkers' Compensation Law Section 25-aAdvance Payments of CompensationSick Leave PlanLiability TransferStale ClaimApplication to Reopen ClaimWork-Related InjuryBack InjuryTreating Physician Report
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 29 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