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

Hanna v. Clarke

Albert J. Hanna, an executive delegate of Buffalo Local No. 1, brought an action against Paul J. Clarke, president of the Empire State Telephone Workers’ Organization, seeking a declaratory judgment. Hanna challenged his removal by the union's executive committee for allegedly not taking an active part in a meeting. He argued he was deprived of a fair hearing, as his request for postponement due to dental surgery was denied, and that his actions did not warrant charges under the union's constitution. The court found that while Hanna's actions were "childish, undignified and irritating," they did not justify the charges. Consequently, the court granted Hanna a declaratory judgment, declaring the executive committee's action null and void and enjoining them from disapproving his redesignation on the grounds previously stated.

Declaratory JudgmentUnion LawExecutive DelegateFair HearingDue ProcessUnion ConstitutionInternal Union DisputeWorkers' RightsPostponement RefusalExecutive Committee
References
1
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 03703
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 02, 2020

Matter of Djukic v. Hanna Andersson, LLC

Claimant Anela Djukic, a sales lead for Hanna Andersson, LLC, slipped and fell inside a shopping mall entrance on her way to work. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially established her claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding the injury did not arise out of and in the course of her employment. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, reiterating that for off-premises accidents to be compensable, there must be a special hazard at the location and a close association of the access route with the employment premises. The court found no evidence that the chosen entrance served a business purpose, was controlled by the employer, or presented a risk specifically related to claimant's employment, concluding the wet ground condition was a general danger to any passerby.

off-premises injurygoing and coming rulespecial hazard exceptionWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate Divisionslip and fallmall entrancecourse of employmentarise out of employmentemployer control
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 25, 2010

In re Alicia G.

The case concerns a petition for permanent neglect filed by Heartshare Human Services against Hanna Muhammad and Al G., the incarcerated parents of Alicia. The court examined whether the agency made diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship and if the parents adequately planned for Alicia's future, considering their incarceration. The petition against the mother, Hanna Muhammad, was dismissed as the agency failed to convincingly prove a lack of planning or cooperation. However, the petition against the father, Al G., was granted due to his failure to plan, with his disposition adjourned to a later date. The decision highlights the nuanced application of Social Services Law § 384-b for incarcerated parents.

Permanent NeglectIncarcerated ParentsSocial Services LawParental Rights TerminationDiligent EffortsParental PlanningFoster CareChild WelfareNew York Family LawChild Best Interests
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hanna-Barbera Productions, Inc. v. Screen Gems-Emi Music Inc.

Plaintiff Hanna-Barbera Productions, Inc. sued Screen Gems-EMI Music Inc., Colgems-EMI Music Inc. (collectively EMI), and Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) for copyright infringement and state law violations. EMI moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing that the claims were primarily based on contract law, not copyright law. The court applied the three-part Schoenberg v. Shapolsky Publishers, Inc. test, determining that Hanna-Barbera's infringement claim was incidental to contract disputes, not a breach of a condition to a copyright contract, and EMI's actions did not constitute a material breach creating a right of rescission. The court found that the central issue revolved around the interpretation of contracts regarding copyright ownership and revenue distribution, which falls under state contract law. Therefore, the court granted EMI's motion, dismissing both federal and state claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Copyright infringementContract disputeSubject matter jurisdictionFederal courtLicense agreementRoyaltiesMusic copyrightsDismissalSecond Circuit lawSchoenberg test
References
19
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 05190 [198 AD3d 1280]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 01, 2021

Mansour v. Paddock Chevrolet, Inc.

Plaintiff Hanna G. Mansour, a car salesman for Paddock Chevrolet, Inc., sustained personal injuries during a test drive with a customer, Kent P. Neubeck, when their vehicle collided with another operated by Santino C. Lococo. Mansour received workers' compensation benefits. Paddock Chevrolet, Inc. moved to dismiss the amended complaint and cross claims against it, asserting they were barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 11. The Supreme Court denied this motion. The Appellate Division modified the order, dismissing the amended complaint against Paddock Chevrolet, Inc. on the grounds of employer immunity, but affirmed the denial of dismissal for the cross claims, converting them into third-party complaints, stating that the determination of 'grave injury' under Workers' Compensation Law § 11 was premature without discovery.

Workers' Compensation LawEmployer ImmunityVicarious LiabilityDual Capacity DoctrineGrave InjuryCross ClaimsThird-Party ComplaintsPersonal InjuryMotion to DismissAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Citibank v. New York State Division of Human Rights

Citibank initiated a proceeding to overturn an order from the Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights. This order had found Citibank guilty of age discrimination against its employee, Catherine S. Hanna, and awarded her compensatory damages and back pay. Hanna was dismissed from Citibank after 36 years of employment for alleged insubordination, which she contested, citing a conflict with personal appointments. The court reviewed the evidence, finding that the Commissioner's determination of age discrimination lacked substantial evidentiary support. The court concluded that Hanna failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, and Citibank's stated reason for termination was not a mere pretext for discriminatory actions, thus granting Citibank's petition.

Age DiscriminationEmployment TerminationInsubordinationPrima Facie CasePretextSubstantial EvidenceJudicial ReviewHuman Rights LawExecutive LawEmployer-Employee Dispute
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Hanna v. Able Body Labor

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision which ruled against the causal relationship between a decedent's death and his employment. The decedent died from cardiac arrhythmia, and despite an initial finding by a WCLJ applying a presumption of compensability, the Board reversed this, stating the autopsy and death certificate provided substantial evidence to rebut the presumption. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, noting the lack of contradicting medical evidence from the claimant. The court also denied the claimant's request for further proof, citing her failure to raise the issue before the Board.

Workers CompensationDeath BenefitsCausal RelationshipUnwitnessed DeathPresumption of CompensabilityCardiac ArrhythmiaAtherosclerotic Coronary Artery DiseaseMedical EvidenceAppellate ReviewRebuttal of Presumption
References
7
Case No. ADJ9478710
Regular
Apr 28, 2015

Hanna Kefetew vs. Neiman Marcus, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

This case involves applicant Hannah Kefetew's petition for removal of a WCJ's order setting a trial for her workers' compensation claim. The petition was denied because the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Appeals Board also noted issues with proper attorney representation and service of documents. Reconsideration is deemed an adequate remedy if a final decision is adverse to the applicant.

Petition for RemovalWCJThreshold IssueInjury arising out of and occurring in the course of employmentCumulative PeriodAbdomenPsycheSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmIncomplete Discovery
References
1
Case No. ADJ1975641 (SRO 0139288)
Regular
Nov 15, 2010

LETEBRHAN BERHE vs. DLK VENTURES INC. dba HANNA HOUSE, RIDLEY NURSING HOME; VIRGINIA, SURETY INSURANCE COMPANY as, administered by FIRSTCOMP OMAHA

Defendant seeks reconsideration of an award finding applicant sustained a work injury and granted benefits, including reimbursement to EDD from applicant's permanent disability award. The defendant contends the WCJ erred by not ordering applicant to reimburse EDD directly. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the decision, and returned the matter to the trial level. This action was taken to allow the WCJ to determine EDD's entitlement to reimbursement directly from the defendant, given the defendant's failure to notify EDD of permanent disability payments after receiving EDD's lien notice.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDLK VENTURES INC.HANNA HOUSERIDLEY NURSING HOMEVIRGINIA SURETY INSURANCE COMPANYFIRSTCOMP OMAHAADJ1975641SRO 0139288LETEBRHAN BERHEFindings and Award
References
0
Case No. ADJ756255 (AHM 0069873)
Regular
Jun 10, 2010

DAVID HANNA vs. UNITED STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INC., CHINO VALLEY MEDICAL, CIGA serviced By BROADSPIRE for SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE in liquidation, TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE (RSKCO) c/o BROADSPIRE

This case involves Transportation Insurance Company's petition for removal, seeking to avoid joinder as a defendant in a workers' compensation claim. Transportation argues they were prejudiced by not having an opportunity to defend against the original claim due to CIGA's alleged failures. The Board denied the petition, finding that Transportation has not yet established significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The joinder order is not final, and Transportation still has the opportunity to litigate the special/general employment issue, which will determine their ultimate liability.

Petition for RemovalJoinder as Party DefendantIrreparable HarmSignificant PrejudiceCIGASpecial/General EmploymentStatute of LimitationsDue ProcessContribution ClaimWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 10 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