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

Stephens v. Colvin

Plaintiff Duane Stephens sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his application for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income. The U.S. Magistrate Judge found that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred at step three by not finding plaintiff's intellectual disability met Listing 12.05(c) and that the ALJ's Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) determination was not supported by substantial evidence, particularly regarding plaintiff's attention and concentration limitations. The court granted the plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings and remanded the case to the Commissioner for reconsideration, emphasizing the need to re-evaluate adaptive functioning deficits and potentially consult a vocational expert.

Disability Insurance BenefitsSupplemental Security IncomeSocial Security ActAdministrative Law Judge (ALJ) ReviewAppeals Council ReviewResidual Functional Capacity (RFC)Listing of Impairments (Appendix 1)Intellectual DisabilityAdaptive Functioning DeficitsChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. Apfel

The plaintiff applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits, alleging disability since August 1993 due to bipolar disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and phobias. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the claim, a decision upheld by the Appeals Council. The plaintiff subsequently brought this matter to the District Court, contending that the ALJ misapplied legal standards by failing to properly weigh his treating physician's opinion, incorrectly concluding his impairments did not meet a listed impairment, and inadequately describing his work capabilities. The court found that the ALJ failed to apply the proper legal standard to the treating physician's opinion and improperly discredited the plaintiff's subjective complaints by mischaracterizing evidence in the record. As a result, the court reversed the ALJ's decision and remanded the case, ordering reconsideration of the treating physician's opinion, the plaintiff's functional limitations, and further development of the record concerning the plaintiff's residual functional capacity.

Disability BenefitsSocial Security ActSSISSDIBipolar DisorderADHDPhobiasTreating Physician RuleALJ ErrorRemand
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brothers v. Colvin

Plaintiff, who commenced this action in 2016, sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's decision to deny his application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The plaintiff had his SSI benefits terminated in 2013 after an age 18 redetermination, despite suffering from obesity, asthma, and a learning disability. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an unfavorable decision in 2014, which the Appeals Council upheld in 2015. The U.S. District Court, presided over by Judge Mae A. D’Agostino, found that the ALJ failed to properly evaluate the plaintiff's claim under the Listed Impairments of § 12.05 (Intellectual Disability) and did not adequately address evidence of adaptive functioning deficits. Consequently, the court vacated the Commissioner's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.

SSI BenefitsDisability DeterminationSocial Security LawIntellectual Disability EvaluationIQ TestingAdaptive FunctioningObesity ImpairmentAsthma ImpairmentLearning DisabilityRemand Order
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 10, 2000

Meis v. ELO Organization, L. L. C.

Plaintiff, a plumber, suffered the complete amputation of the thumb of his dominant hand due to an unsecured pipe falling on him, resulting in significant functional deficits, phantom pain, and future osteoarthritic changes. These injuries have rendered him unable to pursue his trade or engage in routine daily and recreational activities. The case addresses whether these injuries constitute a 'grave injury' under Workers’ Compensation Law § 11, which would permit third-party recovery against his employer. The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Spartan Plumbing and Heating's motion for summary judgment, concluding that a jury must determine if the impairment is sufficiently 'grave'. The decision emphasizes a liberal construction of the Workers’ Compensation Law and differentiates this case from others involving less severe injuries, underscoring the vital role of the thumb in human activity despite its specific omission from the statutory list of grave injuries.

Grave InjuryWorkers' Compensation Law § 11Third-Party LiabilitySummary JudgmentAmputationLoss of Hand UsePlumberOccupational InjuryJudicial InterpretationStatutory Construction
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Vay v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Plaintiff Emily R. Vay sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying her application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Plaintiff alleged disability due to anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, pervasive development disorder, Asperger's syndrome, and learning disability since January 16, 2014. Her application was initially denied, and after a hearing before Administrative Law Judge William M. Manico, an unfavorable decision was issued on January 21, 2016, which became the Commissioner's final decision after the Appeals Council denied review on May 26, 2017. Before the District Court, both parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiff argued that the ALJ failed to develop the record regarding recent treatment, improperly assessed her credibility, and mischaracterized her impairments, leading to an unsupported Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) finding. The Court, presided over by Judge Elizabeth A. Wolford, granted the Commissioner's motion and denied Plaintiff's motion, finding that the Commissioner's determination was supported by substantial evidence and free from legal error. The Court concluded that the ALJ adequately developed the record, made a reasonable credibility assessment based on conflicting evidence, and properly assessed Plaintiff's impairments and RFC.

Supplemental Security IncomeSocial Security ActDisability BenefitsALJ Decision ReviewResidual Functional CapacityCredibility AssessmentRecord DevelopmentAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderAnxiety DisorderAutism Spectrum Disorder
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wilmerding v. O'Dwyer

The plaintiff, identified as a taxpayer, initiated an action seeking to prevent the City of New York and its Board of Transportation from issuing and selling budget notes. The purpose of these notes was to cover a significant deficit resulting from retroactive wage increases approved for subway employees. The central legal question involved the interpretation of the Local Finance Law, specifically whether the deficit qualified as an 'expenditure' with financing limitations or a 'claim which may be settled or compromised,' allowing for unlimited funding. The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's motion for an injunction and dismissed the complaint, concluding that the subway deficit constituted a mandatory claim subject to settlement or compromise under the Local Finance Law, thereby permitting the issuance of the budget notes.

Municipal FinanceBudget NotesSubway OperationsLocal Finance LawStatutory InterpretationWage IncreasesPublic EmployeesTaxpayer ActionInjunctionCity of New York
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fox News Network, LLC v. Tveyes, Inc.

Fox News Network, LLC filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against TVEyes, Inc., a media-monitoring service. The district court previously upheld TVEyes' core service as fair use but reserved judgment on four specific features: archiving, e-mailing, downloading, and date-time search. In this renewed decision, the court ruled that TVEyes' archiving function is fair use. The e-mailing function can also be fair use, provided TVEyes implements adequate protective measures. However, the court found that the downloading and date-time search functions are not fair use, concluding they go beyond TVEyes' transformative purpose and pose undue risks to Fox News' copyrights and derivative businesses.

Copyright InfringementFair Use DefenseMedia MonitoringTransformative UseSummary JudgmentArchivingEmail SharingVideo DownloadingDate-Time SearchDigital Rights
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Guttierez v. Berryhill

Betsy Lee Guttierez applied for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income, alleging disability due to various mental health impairments. Her applications were denied by an Administrative Law Judge and the Appeals Council. Guttierez sought judicial review, arguing that the ALJ failed to properly assess her residual functional capacity (RFC) by rejecting the only medical opinion on her mental ability to work without providing adequate reasons or a function-by-function analysis. The Court agreed, finding the ALJ's RFC assessment unsupported by substantial evidence, as the ALJ, a non-medical professional, made a determination of Guttierez's mental capacity without relying on a medical opinion. Consequently, the Court granted Guttierez's motion, denied the Commissioner's motion, and remanded the case for further administrative proceedings.

Social Security ActDisability BenefitsSSIALJ Decision ReviewRFC AssessmentMedical EvidenceMental Health ImpairmentsBipolar DisorderAnxiety DisorderTreating Physician Rule
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 27, 2013

Karabinas v. Colvin

Dimitrios N. Karabinas challenged the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his Disability Insurance Benefits application, arguing the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) committed several legal errors. The court identified flaws in the ALJ's Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) assessment, including failure to accommodate Karabinas's moderate difficulties in concentration, persistence, and pace, and an incomplete function-by-function analysis of his work abilities. Furthermore, the court found the ALJ improperly weighed medical opinions, specifically downplaying the detailed report from Karabinas's chiropractor, and based its credibility determination on a circular logic. Concluding that the ALJ's errors led to an unsupported denial of benefits, the District Court reversed the Commissioner's decision. The case was remanded for the sole purpose of calculating and providing benefits to Karabinas for the specified period.

Disability Insurance BenefitsSocial Security ActRFC AssessmentMedical OpinionCredibility AssessmentVocational ExpertCervical Disc ProblemsPain ManagementChiropractic TreatmentWork Limitations
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matejka v. Barnhart

Plaintiff, Ms. Matejka, alleging disability since March 31, 2000, applied for Disability Insurance Benefits, which was denied by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The plaintiff sought review in District Court, arguing the ALJ's decision lacked sufficient inquiry into past relevant work, a reasoned finding on credibility, a proper residual functional capacity assessment, and a correct determination of the severity of her depression. The District Court found the ALJ's conclusions not supported by substantial evidence due to these deficiencies, particularly regarding the exertional requirements of past work, the evaluation of the plaintiff's credibility, the lack of a function-by-function RFC analysis, and the failure to adequately assess the severity of her depression, especially in light of uncontradicted medical opinions. Consequently, the Court reversed the Commissioner's decision and remanded the case for a new hearing consistent with its findings.

Disability Insurance BenefitsAdministrative Law JudgeResidual Functional CapacityCredibility AssessmentMedical EvidencePsychological AssessmentSpinal StenosisChronic Back PainDepressionRemand
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 467 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