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

Claim of Guess v. Finger Lakes Ambulance

The claimant, a paramedic, suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder after responding to a fatal industrial accident where a victim conversed with her before succumbing to horrific injuries. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found the injury accidental, the Workers' Compensation Board later disallowed the claim, asserting that the stress was not greater than what a paramedic typically experiences. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing evidence that paramedics are routinely exposed to traumatic events. This ruling emphasizes that for a mental injury from psychic trauma to be compensable, the stress must exceed that of a similarly situated worker's normal work environment.

Post-Traumatic Stress DisorderParamedicAccidental InjuryPsychic TraumaWorkers' Compensation BenefitsStress-Related InjuryNormal Work EnvironmentTraumatic Event ExposureMental Injury CompensabilityAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kolomick v. New York Air National Guard

The plaintiff sought to challenge a military personnel decision concerning his qualifications as a medical pararescue technician in the New York Air National Guard, pursuing a claim under the Human Rights Law after an unsuccessful internal discrimination complaint. The court considered whether civilian courts possessed subject matter jurisdiction over such military employment decisions. Justice O'Brien concurred with the decision to affirm the lower court's ruling, asserting that civilian courts lack jurisdiction to interfere with military personnel matters. This position is supported by established legal precedent and policy reasons emphasizing the military's distinct hierarchical structure and the need to avoid judicial second-guessing of professional military judgments. The opinion also discussed the inapplicability of anti-discrimination statutes like Title VII and the ADEA to military personnel without explicit legislative intent, further reinforcing the principle of non-interference by civilian courts in military affairs.

Military Personnel DecisionsSubject Matter JurisdictionJudicial ReviewNational GuardHuman Rights LawDiscrimination Complaint ProcedureMilitary LawFederal PreemptionCivilian Court InterferenceMilitary Efficiency
References
21
Showing 1-2 of 2 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