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. 2011-610
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 13, 2011

Held v. STATE OF NEW YORK WORKERS'COMPENSATION BD.

This case involves an appeal by William Held Jr., as Chairman of Contractors Compensation Trust, and others, against the State of New York Workers' Compensation Board and others. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeals of New York on its own motion, citing that no substantial constitutional question was directly involved. Additionally, a motion for leave to appeal was denied with costs and necessary reproduction disbursements.

Appellate ProcedureConstitutional LawLeave to Appeal DeniedWorkers Compensation BoardContractors Compensation TrustCourt of AppealsMotion DismissedLegal CostsReproduction DisbursementsNew York State
References
3
Case No. ADJ4120960
Regular
May 06, 2011

JESSICA HAWIT vs. NATIONS CAPITAL GROUP, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) that included a phrase about the applicant being held harmless, which was not in the original settlement agreement. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service of the OACR. While affirming the settlement amount, the Board amended the OACR to strike the "applicant is to be held harmless" language, as the WCJ could not unilaterally rewrite the parties' agreed-upon terms.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationWCJDefective ServiceTimelinessLien ClaimsHeld Harmless
References
4
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 01454
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 23, 2017

Sokolovic v. Throgs Neck Operating Co., Inc.

This case involves an appeal concerning hold harmless and indemnity agreements. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted Vision Healthcare Services' motion to enforce a hold harmless agreement and Throgs Neck Operating Company, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment on its contractual indemnity claim against Vision. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed these orders. The court held that the plaintiff was obligated to hold Vision harmless from Throgs Neck's indemnification claim due to a hold harmless agreement executed during settlement. It further clarified that a nurse provided by Vision to Throgs Neck remained Vision's general employee, thereby triggering Vision's contractual indemnity obligation, despite being considered a special employee of Throgs Neck for the purpose of Throgs Neck's liability to the plaintiff.

hold harmless agreementcontractual indemnityspecial employeegeneral employeestaffing agreementsettlement agreementsummary judgmentnegligenceagency liabilityappellate review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Held v. Hall

This CPLR article 78 proceeding addressed the compatibility of holding a county legislator position and a municipal Police Chief position concurrently. The respondent, elected as a Westchester County Legislator, sought to retain his role as Police Chief of the Town/Village of Harrison. Petitioners argued that these two offices were incompatible under common law and a local Westchester County law (Local Law No. 10). The court, presided over by John P. DiBlasi, J., found both common-law incompatibility and a statutory bar applied. It ruled that by accepting and qualifying for the county legislator position on December 3, 2001, the respondent, by implication, resigned from his Police Chief position as per established common law. Consequently, the court vacated a prior preliminary injunction that had prevented the respondent from fully exercising his powers as a county legislator, affirming his eligibility for the legislative role since December 3, 2001.

Incompatible OfficesDual Office HoldingPublic OfficerCounty LegislatorPolice ChiefCommon Law IncompatibilityStatutory BarLocal LawWestchester CountyImplied Resignation
References
38
Case No. ADJ234762, MON 0356645, ADJ2358121, MON 0356646, ADJ2518900, MON 0356647, ADJ3669155, VNO 0479411, ADJ684024, VNO 0479412, ADJ806318, VNO 0547904
Regular
Aug 20, 2013

DALILA CHOTO vs. LSG SKYCHEFS, LIBERTY MUTUAL

The WCAB granted reconsideration to review an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) where a C&R settled claims for $87,000. The applicant seeks to set aside the OACR and strike a clause stating the defendant is not held harmless for treatment outside the MPN, alleging its inclusion was a mistake. The Board vacated the OACR, returning the case for a hearing on the settlement's adequacy by a new WCJ. One Commissioner dissented, arguing the applicant signed the C&R acknowledging understanding and that inadvertence is insufficient grounds to vacate.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseMPNmedical liensinadvertencemistakeneglectvacateadequacy
References
2
Case No. ADJ6552646
Regular
Mar 26, 2014

CYNTHIA MOLINA vs. NORDSTROM, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a prior ruling that held the applicant responsible for medical bills incurred outside Nordstrom's Medical Provider Network (MPN). The WCAB determined that a "hold-harmless" clause in a stipulated award had no legal effect, as employers cannot assign their statutory duty to provide medical treatment. Lien claimants are subject to the WCAB's exclusive jurisdiction and can only recover from the employer under Labor Code section 4600 if the employer neglected to provide treatment. For self-procured treatment under section 4605, the employee is personally liable, and providers must pursue collection in civil court, not through WCAB liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNordstrom Inc.Medical Provider NetworkStipulations with Request for AwardLabor Code Section 3751(b)Labor Code Section 4605Hold-Harmless ClauseLien ClaimsSelf-Procured TreatmentExclusive Jurisdiction
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Garza v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n

This workers' compensation case involves an appellant, Garza, who suffered a total and permanent loss of the use of both feet due to an on-the-job injury. A jury found that Garza would require future nursing services, valuing them at $80,000, but the trial court subsequently disregarded this finding. Garza appealed, challenging both the disregard of the nursing services award and the trial court's decision to allow testimony from an undisclosed witness, Humberto Castellanos. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that Castellanos's testimony was cumulative and therefore harmless. Furthermore, the court held that under Texas law (Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 8307 § 5), future nursing services not actually furnished before the judgment are not recoverable, even if provided by family members.

Workers' CompensationJury VerdictFuture Nursing ServicesDiscovery SanctionsUndisclosed WitnessCumulative TestimonyStatutory InterpretationTexas LawAppellate ReviewMedical Expenses
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ex Parte Snow

James Aubrey Snow, the relator, sought a writ of habeas corpus, arguing his illegal confinement by the Harris County Sheriff. He was held in contempt by the 309th Judicial District Court for failing to pay $2700 in child support arrears, as ordered by a 1980 decree to Geor-ganne Jill Snow. The relator raised five points of error, including the lack of a separate written contempt order, ambiguity in the original decree, compelled testimony violating his self-incrimination privilege, lack of identity proof, and his alleged inability to pay. The court overruled all points, finding the combined commitment and contempt order valid, the decree's language sufficient, any error in testimony harmless as contempt was already proven, identity was not an issue, and he failed to conclusively prove inability to pay. Consequently, the writ of habeas corpus was denied, and Snow was remanded to custody.

Child Support ArrearsContempt of CourtHabeas Corpus PetitionIllegal ConfinementFifth Amendment PrivilegeSelf-IncriminationAbility to PayDue ProcessJudicial ReviewFamily Law Enforcement
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2004

Duane Reade, Inc. v. Local 338 Retail, Wholesale, Department Store Union

The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against Local 338 and individual defendants. The dismissal of claims against Local 338 was required because the plaintiff failed to plead that each individual union member authorized or ratified the unlawful action, referencing the Martin v Curran rule. The court also held that individual defendants cannot be held liable for acts committed in their capacity as union representatives, even if those acts were not authorized by the union membership, unless conduct unrelated to their official roles is alleged. Plaintiffs' cross-motion for leave to amend was denied.

CPLR 3211(a)(7)Dismissal of ComplaintUnion LiabilityIndividual CapacityAuthorization and RatificationUnion RepresentativesMotion to DismissLeave to AmendAppellate AffirmationNew York Courts
References
9
Case No. 2019-04-0270
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 29, 2021

Wright, Tracy v. Joshua Cooper, d/b/a J&K Inprovements

The Court held an Expedited Hearing to determine if Mr. Cooper was obligated to provide Mr. Wright medical and temporary disability benefits for a work-related left-foot fracture. The Court found Mr. Wright was likely Mr. Cooper's employee and not an independent contractor when he fell from a roof. It also held Mr. Wright is likely to prove entitlement to payment of reasonable and necessary medical expenses. However, he did not provide enough evidence for the Court to determine the proper compensation rate, and thus temporary disability benefits were denied at this time. Mr. Wright was found eligible for reimbursement of medical expenses from the Uninsured Employer's Fund.

Employee Classification DisputeUninsured Employer BenefitsWorkers' Compensation EligibilityMedical Treatment ReimbursementTemporary Total DisabilityCalcaneal FractureRoofing AccidentWork-Related InjuryJudicial ReviewExpert Medical Testimony
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 2,075 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