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. 2017 NY Slip Op 27428
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Bd. v. Compensation Risk Mgrs., LLC

This action was brought by the New York State Workers' Compensation Board (WCB), as an assignee of former members of the Healthcare Industry Trust of New York (HITNY), against Compensation Risk Managers, LLC (CRM), HITNY trustees, and auditing firm UHY LLP. The WCB alleged mismanagement, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent auditing, leading to the Trust's insolvency. Defendants moved to dismiss on grounds of standing, statute of limitations, and pleading particularity. The court dismissed certain derivative claims and negligent misrepresentation claims against some trustees due to standing issues and statute of limitations. All claims against UHY LLP were dismissed for lack of a near-privity relationship or prior precedent. An implied indemnity claim against the trustees was sustained. The WCB's cross-motion to consolidate related actions was denied.

Workers' Compensation LawGroup Self-Insured Trust (GSIT)Fiduciary DutyNegligenceNegligent MisrepresentationStatute of LimitationsStandingDerivative ActionImplied IndemnityAuditing Firm Liability
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Aminov v. New York Black Car Operators Injury Compensation Fund, Inc.

Claimant, a black car operator for the New York Black Car Operators Injury Compensation Fund, Inc., sustained injuries when his limousine was struck by another vehicle. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that his injuries were compensable, having occurred while performing 'covered services.' The employer and the State Insurance Fund appealed, contending that without a specific assignment, claimant was not performing covered services. The court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that logging onto the employer's website and driving to an area with high fare activity to increase chances of an assignment was sufficient to constitute performing covered services under Executive Law § 160-cc (4).

Black Car OperatorAccidental InjuryCourse of EmploymentCovered ServicesDispatch InterpretationLog-on ActivityStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewEmployer LiabilityInsurance Fund
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Haney v. Schiavone Construction

Claimant sustained a compensable injury in 1980 and was later classified as permanently totally disabled, requiring home care services provided by his spouse. Initially, home care payments were set at $525 per week. In 1989, claimant sought and was granted an increase to $1,000 per week, retroactive to January 1, 1989, based on prevailing nursing rates. The employer and carrier appealed this increase, arguing the Workers' Compensation Law did not permit such increases for spousal care and that the Board lacked authority to modify the initial valuation. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the increase. This court further affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the Workers' Compensation Law makes employers liable for necessary home care, including spousal services, and that the Board has continuing jurisdiction to modify awards and properly used prevailing health cost data to determine reasonable value.

Workers' CompensationHome Care ServicesSpousal CarePermanent Total DisabilityIncreased PaymentsPrevailing RateContinuing JurisdictionBoard AuthorityMedical ExpensesAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Larabee v. Governor of the State

Members of the New York State Judiciary initiated a lawsuit against various State of New York officials, challenging the government's failure to increase judicial compensation since 1999. The plaintiffs asserted two causes of action: an unconstitutional diminishment of compensation due to inflation and a violation of the separation of powers doctrine through the practice of 'linkage' – tying judicial salary increases to legislative pay raises. The Supreme Court dismissed the first cause of action and all claims against the Governor, but granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the second cause of action, finding that linkage unconstitutionally abused power by depriving the Judiciary of compensation increases. This appellate court affirmed both Supreme Court orders, agreeing that legislative inaction did not constitute a direct diminishment of compensation but that the employed 'linkage' violated the separation of powers by subordinating the judicial branch to the political maneuvering of the executive and legislative branches. The dismissal of the Governor as a defendant was also affirmed.

Judicial CompensationSeparation of PowersLegislative ImmunityJudicial IndependenceConstitutional LawLinkage DoctrineInflation ImpactNew York State GovernmentBudgetary PoliticsAppellate Review
References
35
Case No. ADJ8181938; ADJ8702275
Regular
Apr 10, 2023

KAREN MILLER vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, VENTURA YOUTH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued against the statutory 15% increase, the method of evaluating spine impairment, and the inclusion of a sleep disorder. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding no error in the application of the 15% increase or the evaluation of the spine impairment using the ROM method as deemed appropriate by the agreed medical examiner. Furthermore, the Board upheld the finding of an industrially caused sleep disorder, noting that formal sleep studies are not always required for diagnosis and that the physician's rating falls within the AMA Guides.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedVentura Youth Correctional FacilityAdjudication NumbersOccupational Group 214Cervical SpineLumbar SpineBilateral ShouldersGastrointestinal System
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jones v. Gardner Motors

Claimant sustained a compensable elbow injury in October 1997, leading to a permanent moderate partial disability and a weekly compensation award. The case was initially closed in June 2000. In February 2005, the claimant filed an RFA-1 form to reopen the case, seeking consideration for reduced earnings. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge subsequently increased the weekly award retroactively to January 2001. The carrier appealed this decision, and the Workers' Compensation Board modified the WCLJ's ruling, rescinding the increased award for the period prior to the February 15, 2005 filing. Claimant appealed the Board's modification, arguing that earlier correspondence constituted applications to reopen. The court affirmed the Board's determination, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion that the claim was reopened on February 15, 2005.

permanent partial disabilityreduced earningsreopening of claimretroactive awardworkers' compensation lawappellate reviewboard determinationclaimant appealmodification of awardcase closed
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 10, 2005

Bremner v. New Venture Gear

Claimant underwent a right knee replacement in 1991 due to a non-work-related condition. In October 2002, he sustained work-related injuries to his right shoulder and right knee, leading to increased knee pain from loosening knee replacement components, ultimately requiring surgery. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found apportionment inapplicable for temporary disability benefits, a decision affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that apportionment does not apply where a pre-existing non-compensable condition did not hinder the claimant's ability to perform job duties at the time of the work-related accident. The court noted that claimant was asymptomatic and fully capable of performing his duties when the accident occurred.

Workers' CompensationApportionmentPre-existing ConditionKnee InjuryWork-related AccidentTemporary Disability BenefitsAppellate ReviewCausationMedical ConditionSurgery
References
4
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 08227
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2018

Matter of Kelly v. New York State Workers' Compensation Bd.

In 2006, claimant Grace Kelly established a workers' compensation claim for an occupational disease. The State Insurance Fund (SIF) repeatedly sought to transfer liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases, which was denied by Workers' Compensation Law Judges. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed these denials and assessed $500 penalties against both SIF and its counsel, Walsh and Hacker, for filing an application for review without reasonable grounds. Walsh and Hacker appealed the penalty imposed against them to the Appellate Division, Third Department. The Appellate Division found insufficient evidence to support the Board's finding that Walsh and Hacker's application lacked reasonable grounds, and therefore reversed the penalty against them, modifying and affirming the Board's decision.

PenaltiesAppellate ReviewSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesWorkers' Compensation Law § 25-aWorkers' Compensation Law § 114-aAttorney SanctionsAdministrative LawBoard DecisionJudiciary Law § 431
References
4
Case No. LAO 805574
Regular
Aug 28, 2007

JESUS RUIZ vs. WEST ELECTRIC CASTING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to clarify that the applicant is entitled to a 50% increase in all past, present, and future compensation. This decision affirms the administrative law judge's finding that the employer's serious and willful misconduct proximately caused the applicant's severe burn injuries. The WCAB found the employer liable for the increased compensation due to directing the applicant, who lacked adequate training and safety equipment, to work on a live electrical unit without proper precautions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSerious and willful misconductIndustrial injuryHandymanMaintenance mechanicLive electrical unitSerious burn injuriesCal OSHALabor Code section 4553Fifty percent increase
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Newman v. Public Oversight Board

This case addresses the interpretation of Workers’ Compensation Law § 16 (2-a) concerning death benefits for a surviving spouse and children upon the spouse’s remarriage. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that the claimant, a surviving spouse, was entitled to a lump-sum payment, and her two children's benefits should increase to 25% each immediately upon her remarriage. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending that the children's increased benefits should be delayed for two years, arguing for a pervasive 66% wage share maximum. The court rejected this argument, affirming the Board's decision, clarifying that the remarriage lump-sum payment is not an advance but a separate entitlement, and thus, the children's benefits increase immediately.

death benefitssurviving spouseremarriage benefitschildren's compensationWorkers' Compensation Lawstatutory interpretationlump-sum paymentwage share maximumWorkers' Compensation Board decisionappellate affirmance
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 21,268 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