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. 2022 NY Slip Op 00289
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2022

Matter of Personal-Touch Home Care of N.Y., Inc. v. City of N.Y. Human Resources Admin.

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, which denied a petition to overturn a decision by the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Contract Dispute Resolution Board (CDRB). The CDRB had found that Personal-Touch Home Care's claim to use unspent Medicaid funds for fiscal year 2007 to offset workers' compensation assessment expenses from 2009-2010 was foreclosed. The court agreed that the State Department of Health (DOH) rationally interpreted its regulations, concluding that these retroactive assessments, levied due to financial mismanagement of a self-insurance trust, were not

Workers' CompensationMedicaid FundsSelf-Insurance TrustFiscal YearRetroactive AssessmentAdministrative LawAgency DeferenceContract DisputeHealth Care AgenciesFinancial Mismanagement
References
4
Case No. ADJ1941485 (VNO 0263845) ADJ4137418 (VNO 0270976) ADJ1018222 (MON 0140131)
Regular
Dec 15, 2008

GERTRUDE CHISM vs. K-MART/SEARS HOLDING CORPORATION, Permissibly Self-Insured Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition to remove WCJ Zarett as moot due to his retirement, and denied the request for a commissioner's hearing on sanctions as premature. The Board remanded the case to the trial level for a full evidentiary hearing on the defendant's allegations regarding the applicant's attorneys, as these factual issues are best addressed by a new Workers' Compensation Judge. The defendant's numerous petitions for removal, vacating hearings, and stays were largely dismissed or denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGertrude ChismK-Mart/Sears Holding CorporationSedgwick Claims Management ServicesPetition for Commissioner's HearingRemoval of Judge ZarettVacate HearingStay ProceedingsImposition of SanctionsGuardian Ad Litem
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 30, 1975

In re Jose D.

The case involves an appeal against a Family Court order from Bronx County, issued on April 30, 1975, which placed an appellant with the Division for Youth Title III. This placement followed a 1973 determination that the appellant was a person in need of supervision (PINS), stemming from a 1972 petition filed by his mother due to truancy and disobedience. After an initial placement at Lincoln Hall and a subsequent abscondment, the appellant was later located, returned, and then transferred to the Division for Youth. The appellate court unanimously reversed the 1975 order, remanding the case for a new dispositional hearing. The court highlighted that at 16 years old, the appellant's failure to attend school alone could not justify a new petition. Crucially, evidence presented at the hearing indicated the appellant's efforts towards rehabilitation while residing with his mother, her desire for him to remain home, and the willingness of a Legal Aid Society social worker to help arrange a specialized school program, suggesting more suitable alternatives to confinement.

PINSJuvenile JusticeFamily LawTruancyDispositional HearingAppealReversed and RemandedRehabilitationChild WelfareNew York Family Court
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Mensch

Henry Mensch, the debtor, filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. He failed to appear at his Section 524(d) discharge hearing due to a disabling stroke, leading to a legal question regarding the mandatory attendance requirement. The court reviewed relevant statutes and legislative history, as well as prior case law, to determine if a debtor could be excused from personal appearance. It concluded that a debtor with a valid, sufficient excuse, who does not intend to reaffirm any debts and is to be granted a discharge, is not required to attend the Section 524(d) hearing. The court ultimately granted Henry Mensch's discharge.

BankruptcyChapter 7Discharge HearingDebtor AppearanceSection 524(d)Statutory InterpretationLegislative IntentMedical ExcuseReaffirmation of DebtsBankruptcy Code
References
14
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 03275 [217 AD3d 1168]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 15, 2023

Matter of Jazmyne VV.

This case involves an appeal by Jazmyne VV. from an order of the Family Court of Cortland County, which adjudicated her a Person in Need of Supervision (PINS). The principal of Randall Middle School, Juliann Quinn, filed the PINS petition due to Jazmyne's habitual truancy and disobedient behavior. Jazmyne argued that the PINS petition was jurisdictionally defective, citing the absence of a manifestation determination hearing and the Probation Department's failure to provide its case record to Family Court. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that a manifestation determination hearing was not warranted as Jazmyne was not a special education student at the time, the record was made available to the court, and the petition adequately detailed diversion efforts.

PINSTruancySpecial Education Student StatusManifestation Determination HearingDiversion ServicesFamily Court Act Article 7Appellate ReviewJurisdictional DefectsCortland CountySchool Discipline
References
12
Case No. ADJ2688453 (RDG 0198704) ADJ6688904 ADJ7542534
Regular
Jan 08, 2016

DERRICK BURFORD vs. COOK CONCRETE PRODUCTS, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

Here is a summary of the case for a lawyer in four sentences: Defendant Everest National Insurance Company sought removal of a WCJ's order compelling their claims adjuster to personally appear at all future hearings. The Board granted removal, finding the order vague, overbroad, and that it would cause significant prejudice and irreparable harm to the defendant. The Board rescinded the order, ruling that the need for personal appearance should be determined on a hearing-by-hearing basis. The matter was returned to the WCJ for further proceedings, including an upcoming mandatory settlement conference.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceWCJ OrderClaims Adjuster AppearanceSignificant PrejudiceIrreparable HarmOverbroad OrderAdministrative Law Judge DiscretionConsolidated Cases
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2003

In re Department of Social Work of Beth Israel Medical Center

The Supreme Court, New York County, granted a guardianship petition for an appellant under Mental Hygiene Law article 81. The appellant, an incapacitated person, through her counsel Mental Hygiene Legal Service (MHLS), demanded a jury trial, but the lower court denied it, conducting a preliminary hearing and finding a prima facie case for guardianship. On appeal, the order was unanimously reversed. The appellate court found that the appellant was improperly denied her statutory right to a jury trial and an opportunity to develop a factual record, citing procedural errors. The matter was remanded for a jury trial to properly ascertain the facts regarding the necessity of a guardian.

GuardianshipIncapacitated PersonMental Hygiene LawJury TrialDue ProcessProcedural ErrorAppellate ReviewBeth Israel HospitalMental HealthDementia
References
3
Case No. 526722
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2019

Matter of Persons v. Halmar Intl., LLC

Claimant Matthew Persons appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found he violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a by exaggerating his condition and failing to disclose volunteer firefighter activities, leading to disqualification from future wage replacement benefits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found the Board's decision was not supported by substantial evidence, as it was based on speculation, surmise, and mischaracterizations of claimant's activities and medical records. The court noted that claimant was forthcoming about his volunteer work and that video surveillance did not conclusively contradict his reported injuries. Consequently, the decision was reversed, and the matter was remitted to the Board for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation LawFraudExaggerated ConditionVolunteer Firefighter ActivitiesWage Replacement BenefitsSubstantial EvidenceMedical TestimonyPsychiatric DisabilityVideo SurveillanceRemittal
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rohan v. North Main Street Development Corp.

The plaintiff appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Rockland County, which dismissed her personal injury complaint against her employer. The plaintiff sustained injuries on the employer's premises after going off duty, attributable to a co-employee's actions. The defendant moved to dismiss based on Workers' Compensation Law sections 11 and 29 (6), asserting workers' compensation was the exclusive remedy. The appellate court reversed the order, remitting the case to the Workers’ Compensation Board for a factual hearing to determine the plaintiff's rights under the Workers’ Compensation Law and stayed the trial pending the Board's determination. This decision upholds the Workers’ Compensation Board's primary jurisdiction in such matters.

Personal InjuryWorkers' CompensationExclusive RemedyPrimary JurisdictionAppellate ProcedureRemandStay of ProceedingsCo-employee InjuryEmployment PremisesOff-Duty Injury
References
4
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05688
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2025

Matter of Sahara Constr. Corp. v. New York City Off. of Admin. Trials & Hearings

Sahara Construction Corp. challenged a determination by the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH) that upheld civil penalties and a restitution order for violations related to a home improvement project. The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed the CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court confirmed OATH's determination, finding that the imposed civil penalties of $5,000 and restitution of $230,266.63 were not disproportionate and fell within statutory guidelines. The Court also affirmed the denial of the petitioner's motions to dismiss and compel discovery, concluding they were not arbitrary and capricious. Consequently, the petition was denied, and the proceeding dismissed on the merits.

Home Improvement ContractorsCivil PenaltiesRestitution AwardAdministrative Code ViolationsCPLR Article 78Judicial ReviewAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionSense of FairnessAdministrative Summons
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 5,015 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