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. 222 AD2d 184
Regular Panel Decision

Nuzzo v. Griffin Technology Inc.

Plaintiffs Karen L. Patzer and Patricia E. Nuzzo, employees of Syracuse University (SU), were injured while operating a cash register manufactured by Griffin Technology Incorporated (Griffin). SU, contractually an additional insured under Griffin's liability policy with Federal Insurance Company (Federal), sought coverage after being impleaded by Griffin. Federal retroactively added SU as an additional insured but subsequently disclaimed coverage based on an employer's liability exclusion. The court ruled Federal's four-month delay in disclaiming coverage to SU was untimely, making the exclusion inapplicable. Consequently, the antisubrogation rule required dismissal of Griffin's third-party actions against SU, and SU's counterclaims for breach of contract were dismissed as moot.

Untimely DisclaimerAdditional InsuredEmployer's Liability ExclusionAntisubrogation RuleContractual Duty to InsureRetroactive CoverageSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewIndemnificationContribution
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2012

Claim of Poulton v. Griffin Manufacturing Co.

Griffin Manufacturing Company appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found the claimant did not violate Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a. Griffin alleged the claimant concealed a prior 1979 motor vehicle accident, linked a time-barred 1999 accident to a 2000 incident, and gave inconsistent accounts of the 2000 injury. The WCLJ found no credible evidence of fraud, and the Board affirmed, denying Griffin's application to reopen the 2000 claim. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported its determination that the claimant did not make a material misrepresentation, noting that Griffin acknowledged the 1999 date was likely a typo for a disclosed 1998 incident and inconsistent accounts created a credibility issue for the Board.

Workers' CompensationFraud AllegationMaterial MisrepresentationReopening ClaimSubstantial EvidenceCredibility IssueAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionMachinist InjuryEmployer Appeal
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2006

Ruiz v. Griffin

Old Navy, Inc. appealed an order denying its motion for summary judgment as premature in a wrongful death action. The Supreme Court, Orange County, affirmed the order, concluding that the plaintiffs were entitled to further discovery before a ruling on summary judgment could be made. Additionally, the court rejected Old Navy's argument that the action was precluded by the Workers' Compensation Law, finding that the assault on the decedent by Kevin Griffin was not work-related as it stemmed from personal animosity rather than work-related differences.

Wrongful DeathSummary JudgmentReargumentAppellate ProcedureFailure to ProsecuteDiscoveryWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityWork-Related AssaultPersonal AnimosityPremature Motion
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 1995

Rosario-Suarz v. Wormuth Bros. Foundry, Inc.

Plaintiff initiated an action against his employer, Wormuth Brothers Foundry, Inc., and his law firm, Rapport, Meyers, Griffin & Whitbeck, following a heart attack, alleging that Wormuth intentionally hindered his workers' compensation claim and Rapport failed to protect his rights. Wormuth's motion for summary judgment was denied by the Supreme Court. On appeal, the court found the Supreme Court erred, ruling that the plaintiff failed to establish "disinterested malevolence" for prima facie tort and intentional interference with contract claims, and lacked justifiable reliance for the fraud claim. The appellate court granted Wormuth's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims against it.

Summary JudgmentPrima Facie TortTortious InterferenceFraud ClaimsLegal MalpracticeWorkers' Compensation BenefitsStatute of LimitationsEmployer LiabilityAppellate ReviewDismissal of Complaint
References
9
Case No. ADJ4189084 (AHM 0150210), ADJ2609035 (MON 0237343), ADJ2256301 (MON 0237524), ADJ4536480 (MON 0315454)
Regular
Feb 05, 2015

Dennis Pasquel vs. The Boeing Company, ACE American Insurance Company, Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board overturned a judge's decision and allowed a lien for medical treatment provided by Dr. Powers at Griffin Medical Group. The Board found that while Dr. Powers was listed in the employer's Medical Provider Network (MPN) at a specific facility, there was no explicit restriction in the MPN listing prohibiting him from treating patients elsewhere. The Board concluded that contract disputes between a physician and an MPN provider should not prevent payment for medically necessary treatment when the MPN itself acknowledged the physician as a provider. This decision allows Griffin Medical Group to be paid for Dr. Powers' services rendered at their facility.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMedical Provider NetworkMPNLien claimantPrimary treating physicianJoint Findings and OrderReconsiderationStipulated awardsCumulative trauma injuryIndependent Contractor Agreement
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Griffin

The petitioner initiated an action against a property owner after sustaining injuries, leading to an offer of settlement. The petitioner sought a reduction in the Fund's lien to cover attorney's fees and expenses incurred in the recovery from the third party. Upon the Fund's refusal to reduce its lien, the petitioner commenced a proceeding for an order of apportionment. Special Term initially granted the petition, fixing the Fund's share of attorney's fees and expenses at $1,278. However, this decision was deemed erroneous on appeal. The court clarified that the parties' rights stem from a contract of insurance for health benefits, not the Workers' Compensation Law, despite a reference to it in the policy.

Lien ApportionmentThird-Party RecoveryAttorney's FeesContract of InsuranceHealth BenefitsSubrogation RightsAppellate ReviewError in RulingDisability Benefits
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Butler v. Griffin

Petitioner Richard A. Butler sought an order under CPLR article 78 to compel the City of Buffalo to make contributions to the New York State Employees’ Retirement System for his prior CETA service time, and for a class of similarly situated individuals. The core issue involved interpreting Chapter 769 of the Laws of 1975 to determine if employer contributions for CETA service credit were voluntary or mandatory. The court reviewed legislative history and prior conflicting interpretations, including cases like Kaltz v Cohalan and Matter of City of Troy. Ultimately, the court found the legislative intent clear: employer contributions are mandatory. Consequently, the City of Buffalo was ordered to make the required contributions for Butler's CETA service, although his requests for class action status and counsel fees were denied.

CETA Service CreditRetirement ContributionsMandatory Employer ContributionsStatutory InterpretationNew York State Employees' Retirement SystemPublic EmploymentArticle 78 ProceedingClass Action DenialLegislative IntentSuffolk County Supreme Court
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Griffin

This case concerns a defendant charged with robbery and attempted robbery. The trial court relieved the defendant's Legal Aid counsel, David Cohen, without consulting the defendant, citing delays attributed to the defense. However, the appellate court noted that the prosecution had also requested numerous adjournments, leading to delays. The court ruled that discharging counsel without defendant's input was an abuse of discretion and infringed upon the defendant's constitutional right to counsel of choice. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the judgment of conviction and remanded the case for further proceedings, emphasizing that this error was per se reversible and not waived by the defendant's guilty plea.

Right to CounselIndigent DefenseAbuse of DiscretionAttorney-Client RelationshipTrial ManagementAdjournment RequestCriminal ProcedureDue ProcessJudicial InterferenceLegal Aid Society
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Connelly v. Griffin

The court confirmed the disciplinary determination against the petitioner. The determination of guilt was based on the recreation worker's testimony regarding threatening statements made by the petitioner in the gym, which the worker perceived as directed at him due to a prior disagreement. The petitioner's and inmate witnesses' contrary testimony created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer. Furthermore, the court rejected the petitioner's claim of res judicata, clarifying that a previous disciplinary determination, arising from a guilty plea for abusive statements made to the recreation worker on a different day, was a separate incident and thus had no preclusive effect on the current disciplinary action. The petition was ultimately dismissed.

inmate disciplinedisciplinary hearingthreatening statementscredibility issueres judicatacorrectional facilitiesadministrative determinationappellate reviewevidence
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2011

Griffin v. Town of Dewitt

Claimant, a heavy truck mechanic, sustained a back injury requiring surgery in 2009. Despite returning to work without restrictions, he felt unable to perform his duties and retired in 2010, subsequently seeking lost time benefits. The employer and its third-party administrator argued that he had voluntarily withdrawn from the labor market. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a permanent partial disability but denied benefits due to voluntary withdrawal. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, finding an involuntary retirement and awarding continuing benefits. The employer and administrator appealed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial evidence that the claimant's disability significantly contributed to his decision to retire and his ongoing wage loss, supported by his testimony and medical opinions.

Workers' CompensationInvoluntary RetirementPermanent Partial DisabilityLost Time BenefitsLabor Market WithdrawalBack InjuryDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewMedical OpinionSocial Security Benefits
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 43 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