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

Leone v. Creighton

Plaintiff Louis S. Leone sued Joan Leone, Robert Creighton, and the County of Suffolk under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights and state torts. The claims stemmed from an allegedly unfounded criminal harassment charge and a protective order. Defendants Creighton and the County moved to dismiss the federal claims. The court denied Leone's motion to amend his complaint, finding no Fourth Amendment deprivation for the malicious prosecution claim and no cognizable substantive due process or First Amendment violations. Consequently, the federal claims against all defendants were dismissed, but the court retained supplemental jurisdiction over the state tort claims due to the advanced stage of litigation.

Civil Rights42 U.S.C. § 1983Malicious ProsecutionSubstantive Due ProcessFirst AmendmentEqual ProtectionRule 12(b)(6) DismissalSupplemental JurisdictionFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureMotion to Amend
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 1989

De Leon v. Hospital of Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Plaintiffs Joyce De Leon and her infant son Hector De Leon sued Montefiore Hospital and Medical Center (Einstein) following Hector's birth in 1977, alleging injuries due to a nurse's actions during delivery. The lawsuit, initiated in 1988, asserted multiple causes of action including negligent hiring, *in utero* assault, medical malpractice, and fraudulent concealment. Defendants argued the entire action was time-barred by the medical malpractice Statute of Limitations. The Supreme Court initially denied the defendants' Statute of Limitations defense. The Appellate Division modified this decision, ruling that only the negligent hiring claim sounded in simple negligence and was therefore timely, while dismissing the remaining causes of action as time-barred medical malpractice claims.

Negligent HiringMedical MalpracticeStatute of LimitationsInfant InjuryHospital NegligenceProfessional JudgmentMedical TreatmentAppellate ReviewAssault ClaimsFraudulent Concealment
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Leon v. Port Washington Union Free School District

The case of America Leon v. Port Washington Union Free School District involved plaintiff America Leon suing her former employer for alleged unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and for breach of collective bargaining agreements. Leon claimed she worked uncompensated pre-shift hours and during meal breaks. The District moved to dismiss both claims, arguing insufficient pleading for the FLSA claim and issues of standing, timeliness, and notice for the breach of contract claim. The court, presided over by District Judge Wexler, denied the District's motion to dismiss in its entirety, determining that Leon's complaint provided sufficient factual allegations regarding her regular work schedule and uncompensated overtime to state a plausible FLSA claim. The court also found the breach of contract claim adequately alleged, declining to consider extraneous submissions and preserving the District's right to renew its arguments as a motion for summary judgment after discovery.

FLSAovertime wagesbreach of contractmotion to dismisscollective bargaining agreementuncompensated workfederal courtSecond Circuitemployment lawwage dispute
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Leone v. Columbia Sussex Corp.

Alfred Leone sustained injuries when a scaffold plank broke at a construction site owned and operated by Columbia Sussex Corp. He was an employee of Smith Glass Co., a subcontractor, and the scaffold was erected by another subcontractor, Panelized Systems, Ltd. Columbia Sussex Corp. appealed orders denying its motion to amend its answer with a Workers’ Compensation Law defense and denying summary judgment on its third-party complaint against Panelized. The appellate court reversed the denial to amend, finding a question of fact on whether Leone was a special employee of Columbia, thus allowing the Workers' Compensation defense to be asserted. However, the court affirmed the denial of summary judgment for indemnification against Panelized, ruling contractual indemnification inapplicable and common-law indemnification premature.

Personal InjuryScaffold AccidentWorkers' Compensation LawSpecial EmploymentAmended AnswerSummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationCommon-Law IndemnificationSubcontractor LiabilityConstruction Accident
References
9
Case No. 534352
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 01, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Francisco Leon

Claimant Francisco Leon, a construction worker, sought workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained on January 30, 2020, after falling from a scaffold. The employer, Monadnock Construction Inc., and its carrier disputed the claim, but a Workers' Compensation Law Judge established the claim, a decision subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The carrier appealed the Board's ruling, contending it lacked substantial evidence. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that the Board holds broad authority in factual determinations, including witness credibility and drawing reasonable inferences from evidence. The court concluded that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that Leon's injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsScaffold AccidentWork-related InjuryAccidental Injury ClaimAppellate ReviewFactual DeterminationsSubstantial Evidence ReviewMedical EvidenceCredibility AssessmentEmployer Liability
References
9
Case No. CV-22-2146
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Jorge Leon

Claimant Jorge Leon, a construction laborer, sought workers' compensation benefits for neck, back, shoulder, hip, knee, and ankle injuries sustained on November 5, 2021, after falling into a hole at work while carrying rebar. The employer and carrier controverted the claim, disputing notice and compensability. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge established the claim for neck and back injuries, which the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed, crediting the claimant's testimony. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding it was supported by substantial evidence and that the Board's credibility determinations were final.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryArising Out of EmploymentCourse of EmploymentNotice of InjuryWitness CredibilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewNeck InjuryBack Injury
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2012

Avila v. Astrue

Isabel Avila brought this action against the Commissioner of Social Security, challenging the denial of her Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Avila alleged disability due to arthralgias, major depressive disorder, and anxiety, but her application was denied by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), a decision affirmed by the Appeals Council. The District Court upheld the ALJ's determination regarding Avila's physical capacity for 'medium work,' citing reports from Dr. Hitzeman and Dr. Caiati. However, the Court found that the ALJ erred in evaluating Avila's mental impairments, specifically by improperly discrediting the opinion of her treating psychiatrist, Dr. Ibanez, without adequate justification or proper development of the administrative record. Consequently, the Commissioner’s decision is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings to ensure a comprehensive review of the medical evidence.

Social Security BenefitsSupplemental Security IncomeDisability AppealMental ImpairmentDepressionAnxietyArthralgiaTreating Physician RuleALJ ErrorResidual Functional Capacity
References
16
Case No. ADJ7622584
Regular
May 13, 2013

HECTOR AVILA LEON vs. E&C FASHION, INC., TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior dismissal, despite a technical defect in the verification of the petition. Instead of dismissing the petition, the Board rescinded the prior decision. The case is now returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the Workers' Compensation Judge. This action was taken to allow the case to proceed on its merits.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ's Report and RecommendationLabor Code section 5902Code of Civil Procedure 473Grant ReconsiderationRescind DismissalReturn to Trial LevelFurther ProceedingsDecision After ReconsiderationADJ7622584
References
0
Case No. CV-22-2146
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 2024

Matter of Leon v. Structure Tech N.Y., Inc.

Claimant, Jorge Leon, a construction laborer, filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits after sustaining injuries to his neck and back from a fall into a hole while carrying rebar. The employer, Structure Tech New York, Inc., and its carrier controverted the claim, raising issues of lack of notice and no compensable accident. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence and upholding the Board's role as the sole arbiter of witness credibility in resolving conflicting testimony.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryEmployment InjuriesCredibility DeterminationSubstantial EvidenceNotice of InjuryConstruction AccidentFall AccidentRebarNeck Injury
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 1997

Pryer v. Leon D. DeMatteis Construction Corp.

Timothy Pryer, a corrections officer, sustained personal injuries after slipping on sand at the Nassau County Corrections Facility, allegedly due to ongoing construction. He filed a lawsuit against the main contractor, Leon D. DeMatteis Construction Corp., and a subcontractor, S&L Concrete Construction Corp., under the Labor Law. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, granted summary judgment motions by the defendants, dismissing Pryer's Labor Law causes of action and the third-party defendant's counterclaims. On appeal, the order was affirmed, with the court concluding that Pryer was not engaged in activities enumerated in Labor Law §§ 240 or 241(6) and was not injured in a construction area, thus precluding his claims and the related counterclaims.

Personal injurySlip and fallConstruction accidentSummary judgmentAppellate reviewLabor LawSubcontractor liabilityCorrections officerThird-party claimDuty of care
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 214 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