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

In re Jessica C.

This opinion addresses child abuse petitions filed by the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York against Gina C., a babysitter, concerning injuries to Travis S. and potential derivative neglect of Gina C.'s own child, Jessica C. The court examines whether a babysitter, whose services were performed outside the children's home and who is no longer employed, qualifies as a "person legally responsible" under Family Court Act article 10. Judge Guy P. De Phillips concludes that Gina C. is not a properly named respondent. Additionally, the court determines that a derivative finding of neglect for Jessica C. is not justified solely based on a single injury to Travis S., absent independent evidence of neglect. Consequently, both petitions against Gina C. are dismissed, emphasizing the limited jurisdiction of the Family Court and the specific interpretation of "person legally responsible" in the context of family-like relationships.

Child abuseChild neglectBabysitter liabilityFamily Court Act Article 10Legal responsibilityIn loco parentisJurisdictional limitsDerivative neglectStatutory interpretationParental responsibility
References
9
Case No. ADJ6707071
Regular
Nov 02, 2011

GINA STEWART vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

This case concerns applicant Gina Stewart's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB denied reconsideration, affirming the administrative law judge's findings. Applicant sought reversal of the 95% permanent disability rating and the denial of industrial injury to her vision and gastritis. The WCAB found that the Agreed Medical Examiner's reports did not provide substantial evidence for these claims, citing a lack of reasoning and specificity.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryKidney InjuryHeart InjuryHypertensionLupusArterial FibrillationMitral Valve ProlapseHypertensive Heart Disease
References
6
Case No. ADJ10365809 ADJ9413677 ADJ9231147 ADJ9414072
Regular
Oct 06, 2017

GINA LUTTENEGGER vs. CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Gina Luttenegger's petition for reconsideration because it was taken from an interlocutory order regarding the disqualification of an agreed medical examiner, not a final determination of substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also denied her petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denial, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if a final adverse decision is issued. The applicant can still request a supplemental report from the AME.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionProcedural IssueEvidentiary IssueThreshold IssueAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Substantial Prejudice
References
7
Case No. ADJ4681344
Regular
Sep 05, 2008

GINA NASTI vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITAL, KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CARE PROGRAM

The WCJ lacked jurisdiction to amend the April 22, 2008 Findings and Award. The petition for reconsideration is granted, the April 22, 2008 award is rescinded, and the matter is returned for further proceedings.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardGina NastiKaiser Foundation HospitalAmended Findings and AwardTemporary DisabilitySpine InjurySterilization TechOctober 192004August 4
References
3
Case No. ADJ481283 (MON 0323982)
Regular
Sep 28, 2009

GINA MALCOLM vs. KELLY STAFF LEASING, CNA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Gina Malcolm's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. The Board adopted and incorporated the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Therefore, the WCAB's order officially denies the petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedAdministrative Law JudgeWCJKelly Staff LeasingCNAGina MalcolmRonnie G. CaplaneJames C. Cuneo
References
0
Case No. MON 323982 MON 323983
Regular
Mar 10, 2008

Gina Malcolm vs. KELLY STAFF LEASING, CNA

This case concerns Gina Malcolm's workers' compensation claims for a right hip injury and a left shoulder injury. The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision that apportioned 25% of her permanent disability for both injuries to pre-existing, non-industrial osteonecrosis. The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the original finding that the apportionment was proper based on the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion regarding the causation of the permanent disability.

Gina MalcolmKelly Staff LeasingCNAPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardpermanent disabilityapportionmentnon-industrial factorsAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Dr. Jeffrey Berman
References
19
Case No. ADJ3842635
Regular
Jun 03, 2015

GINA FLOYD vs. VHA, INC.; LIBERTY MUTUAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Gina Floyd's representative, Junior Medina of Allied Medical Group. The dismissal was based on the petition's failure to meet the Labor Code's verification requirement. Despite being given notice of this defect, no cure or compelling explanation was provided within a reasonable timeframe. The Board also noted that the petition would have been denied on the merits, had it not been dismissed for the procedural defect.

Petition for ReconsiderationUnverified PetitionLabor Code Section 5902Verified PetitionNotice of DefectCure DefectCompelling ReasonNo PrejudiceWCJ ReportAppeals Board Rules
References
1
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 03616 [239 AD3d 1125]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 12, 2025

Schott v. Lucatelli

Plaintiff, David Schott, sued defendant, Gina Lucatelli, for unpaid construction work on a home in Tompkins County, which he started building for her in 2018 without a written contract due to their familial relationship. A dispute arose in January 2020 over growing costs, and defendant subsequently locked plaintiff out of the unfinished home. Following a nonjury trial, Supreme Court awarded plaintiff $43,400 based on quantum meruit for the reasonable value of his services from May 2019 through January 2020, reduced by $12,750 for defective work, and dismissed defendant's breach of contract counterclaims. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed both the Supreme Court's order and judgment, upholding the quantum meruit award and the grant of prejudgment interest.

Quantum MeruitConstruction ContractUnjust EnrichmentPrejudgment InterestNonjury TrialAppellate ReviewReasonable Value of ServicesDefective WorkFamilial RelationshipGeneral Business Law § 771
References
23
Case No. ADJ4166687 (AHM 0046295) ADJ1681006 (AHM 0088073)
Regular
Jun 13, 2014

GINA NEVARES vs. McMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY, TIG/ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case involves Gina Nevares as the applicant against McMaster-Carr Supply Company and its insurers. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) considered a Petition for Removal filed in this matter. The WCAB adopted the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge and ordered the Petition for Removal dismissed. The dismissal is based on the WCJ's report, which is incorporated by reference.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportDismissalGina NevaresMcMaster-Carr Supply CompanyTIG/Zenith Insurance CompanyZurich North AmericaADJ4166687ADJ1681006
References
0
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 04895 [186 AD3d 1768]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 03, 2020

Matter of Demarco v. Trans Care Ambulance

Claimant Gina DeMarco, an emergency medical technician, sustained back and neck injuries in 2005, leading to a classification of permanently partially disabled. Her benefits were later suspended due to insufficient evidence of labor market attachment. Following a request for further action under an amendment to Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (3) (w), a Workers' Compensation Law Judge ruled in May 2018 that DeMarco was entitled to benefits without needing to show labor market attachment. The employer and carrier appealed to the Workers' Compensation Board, which denied their application for administrative review as incomplete because it failed to specify the date an objection was interposed, as required by 12 NYCRR 300.13 (b) (2) (ii). The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying review due to the carrier's non-compliance with regulatory requirements.

Workers' Compensation LawAdministrative ReviewLabor Market AttachmentAppellate DivisionRegulatory ComplianceClaim DenialPermanent Partial DisabilityWCLJ DecisionForm RB-89
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 22 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