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. 2021 NY Slip Op 01050 [191 AD3d 884]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 17, 2021

Matter of Faith A. M. (Faith M.)

The mother, Faith M., appealed an order from the Family Court, Kings County, which found her to have derivatively neglected her child, Faith A.M. This finding stemmed from a prior neglect determination in May 2014 concerning her other children due to excessive corporal punishment, which the court deemed proximate in time to the current proceeding. The evidence presented, including statements from siblings, testimony from a school counselor, and observations of injuries, corroborated the ongoing use of excessive corporal punishment. The Family Court's assessment of the mother's credibility, finding her denials incredible, was supported by the record, reinforced by her guilty plea to disorderly conduct related to similar allegations. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's order, as the mother failed to provide evidence that the circumstances leading to the neglect finding no longer existed.

Child NeglectDerivative NeglectCorporal PunishmentFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewParental JudgmentPreponderance of EvidenceCredibilityPrior FindingsRisk of Harm
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 1945

Empire Case Goods Workers Union v. Empire Case Goods Co.

Empire Case Goods Workers Union, on behalf of its members, brought an action against Empire Case Goods Company and Sidney G. Bose to recover vacation pay stipulated in a contract. Empire sold its business to Bose, leading both defendants to deny liability for the vacation pay. The Special Term initially dismissed the complaint against both defendants, reasoning that Empire's employees became Bose's and Bose was not party to the contract. On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal against Bose, finding no implied assumption of Empire's wage structure. However, it reversed the dismissal against Empire, holding Empire liable for the vacation pay as employees were not notified of the change in employer and continued to work under Empire's apparent authority, making Empire responsible under master and servant law.

Vacation PayEmployer LiabilitySuccessor LiabilityEmployment ContractSale of BusinessNotice of TerminationAgency RelationshipMaster and Servant LawAppellate ReviewWage Dispute
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jacobson Family Investments, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance

Jacobson Family Investments (JFI) and other plaintiffs invested with Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BLMIS) and purchased fidelity bonds from National Union and other excess insurers. After Madoff's fraud was exposed, JFI submitted a claim for losses including fictitious gains, which National Union denied, asserting coverage was limited to actual losses. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the insurers, limiting coverage to 'actual losses' and dismissing JFI's claim for breach of good faith, but found against aggregating claims and applying a single deductible for all net losers. On appeal, the court affirmed that the term 'loss' in the fidelity bond does not encompass fictitious Madoff gains, stating that one cannot lose money that never existed. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the breach of good faith claim but modified the lower court's decision, holding that the $3 million single loss deductible applies to each individual 'net loser' plaintiff's recovery, rather than being applied only once for all.

Fidelity BondInsurance CoverageMadoff FraudPonzi SchemeActual LossFictitious GainsSummary JudgmentContract InterpretationAmbiguityDeductible Application
References
13
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 05744 [174 AD3d 1206]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 2019

Matter of Civil Serv. Employees Assn., Local 1000, AFSCME AFL-CIO v. New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.

The case involves Jarred Sansky, a probationary employee, terminated from his position as Cadet Leader 1 by the New York State Office of Children and Family Services. Petitioners, including Sansky and the Civil Service Employees Association, challenged the termination under CPLR article 78, arguing Sansky had completed his probationary term and was dismissed in bad faith or retaliation for reporting neglect. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding Sansky was still probationary and petitioners failed to prove bad faith or retaliation. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the dismissal, holding that Sansky's temporary service in a higher position did not automatically count towards his probationary period and that allegations of bad faith or retaliation were unsupported by evidence. Therefore, Sansky, as a probationary employee, was not entitled to a pretermination hearing.

probationary employmentterminationCPLR article 78bad faith dismissalretaliationcivil service lawtemporary appointmentprovisional appointmentNew York State Office of Children and Family ServicesCadet Leader
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Lindsay W.

The Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York appealed an order from the Family Court, Queens County, which effectively dismissed a proceeding to continue the placement of a neglected child, Lindsay W. The Family Court had denied the Commissioner's request for a temporary extension of placement, citing the process server's error in service as an invalid excuse. The appellate court ruled that the Family Court abused its discretion by not granting the temporary extension, finding that the Commissioner had shown 'good cause' through good-faith attempts to notify the respondent mother and an excusable process server misunderstanding. The case was reversed and remitted to the Family Court to determine if the Commissioner's initial petition for extension, filed 11 days late, was also for 'good cause', which would then lead to a merits hearing on the extension of placement.

Child NeglectFamily Court ActPlacement ExtensionService of ProcessAbuse of DiscretionGood CauseParental RightsAppellate ReviewRemittiturTimely Filing
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smilow v. Ulrich

Petitioner Marc Smilow initiated an owner's use holdover proceeding to recover a rent-stabilized apartment for conversion into a single-family home. The respondent tenant sought discovery, including document production and the deposition of petitioner's wife, to determine the petitioner's good-faith intent. Petitioner opposed, citing a lack of 'ample need' and statutory changes regarding good faith. The court, however, reiterated that owners must still demonstrate good faith in such proceedings. Concluding that the facts regarding petitioner's intent were exclusively within his knowledge, the court granted respondent's motion for disclosure and for leave to depose Jill Smilow.

Owner's Use ProceedingHoldover ProceedingRent-Stabilized ApartmentDiscoveryDisclosureCPLR 408Good Faith RequirementLandlord-Tenant LawDeposition of Non-PartyTenant's Defense
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hendren v. Curtis

This case involves a dispute between plaintiff local unions (rock drillers, blasters, and laborers) and corporate defendants and other defendant unions over employment on the Sixth Avenue subway project in New York City. The plaintiff unions sought to prevent corporate defendants from refusing to employ their members and to restrain defendant unions from interfering with their employment, as well as to invalidate a 1937 agreement and enforce a 1936 agreement. The court examined two key agreements, one from 1936 between corporate defendants and local unions (including plaintiffs) outlining general employment terms, and another from 1937, brokered by city authorities, to resolve a strike and jurisdictional disputes, which allocated some work to other unions. The plaintiffs claimed the 1937 agreement was made in bad faith to exclude them. The court found that the 1937 agreement was made in good faith to facilitate project progress and that the corporate defendants made a fair allocation of jobs. The court further determined that the jurisdictional dispute was an internal "family matter" for the International Union to resolve, not the courts. Consequently, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint, concluding they had not made a case for their exclusive right to employment.

Union Jurisdictional DisputeCollective BargainingEmployment AgreementsStrike ResolutionConstruction IndustryTrade UnionsRock DrillersBlastersLaborers' RightsInternal Union Governance
References
0
Case No. 2025 NYSlipOp 01801 [236 AD3d 1020]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 26, 2025

Matter of Borgia v. SCO Family of Servs.

The case involves a dispute between the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn Workers' Compensation Trust (Trust) and SCO Family of Services (SCO) over an unpaid assessment. SCO, a former member of the Trust, was assessed $3.45 million for the Trust's deficit. After making partial payments, SCO sought to verify the assessment, leading the Trustees to initiate a proceeding to enforce an alternative dispute resolution provision. The Supreme Court dismissed the proceeding based on the statute of limitations. The Appellate Division reversed, finding a question of fact as to whether SCO's 2014 partial payment renewed the statute of limitations and whether an installment payment plan was agreed upon. The court also rejected SCO's public policy argument against the dispute resolution provision, remitting the matter for further proceedings.

Alternative Dispute ResolutionContract EnforcementStatute of LimitationsPartial PaymentWorkers' Compensation TrustGroup Self-InsuranceAppellate ReviewQuestion of FactInstallment PaymentsPublic Policy
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mandelkow v. Child & Family Services

Plaintiffs, trustees of a workers' compensation insurance trust, sued a former member (defendant) for breach of trust agreement and unjust enrichment, alleging underpaid premiums due to employee misclassification. Defendant counterclaimed, alleging violations of General Business Law § 349 and breach of implied duty of good faith. The Supreme Court initially granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint but later, upon reargument, granted plaintiffs' cross-motion to dismiss defendant's counterclaims. On appeal, the higher court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, finding plaintiffs lacked authority under the trust agreement to retroactively seek premiums based on misclassification. The court also affirmed the dismissal of defendant's counterclaims, concluding the General Business Law claim involved a private dispute and no implied obligation was breached regarding audits.

Workers' CompensationTrust FundBreach of ContractUnjust EnrichmentSummary JudgmentEmployee MisclassificationRetroactive BillingGood Faith and Fair DealingGeneral Business LawAppellate Review
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Norma B. v. Sven H.

The Family Court of New York County, presided over by Justice Tandra L. Dawson, issued orders on March 31, 2008, September 8, 2008, and October 16, 2007. These orders, in part, found insufficient evidence for aggravating circumstances under Family Court Act § 827 (a) (vii) and denied a petitioner's motion to allow a social worker or the child to testify about out-of-court statements. Upon appeal, the Family Court's credibility findings were affirmed. The appellate court found that acts exposing family members to physical injury were not sufficiently contemporaneous to establish "immediate and ongoing danger." While acknowledging the Family Court's error in denying the child in camera testimony at the dispositional hearing, a remand was deemed unnecessary as such testimony would not have altered the finding regarding aggravating circumstances due to its lack of contemporaneity. The appeal was unanimously affirmed.

Family LawChild TestimonyAggravating CircumstancesCredibility FindingsAppellate ReviewFamily Court ActChild AbuseDomestic ViolenceContemporaneous ActsEvidentiary Ruling
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 3,216 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