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

Clarke v. LR SYSTEMS

Walter Clarke, a 74-year-old former employee of Favorite Plastics, Inc., filed a products liability action against LR Systems and Lasits Rohline Service, Inc. for injuries sustained in an industrial accident on August 13, 1996. Clarke's right hand was pulled into an SG Granulator 300 machine, resulting in the loss of part of his thumb and injury to three fingers. He alleged negligence, strict products liability, and breach of warranty, claiming inadequate warnings and a design defect in the grinder. The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment on the failure-to-warn claim, finding Clarke was aware of the danger. However, the motion for summary judgment was denied on the defective design claims, ruling that the expert testimony regarding the feasibility of an interlocked guard was admissible.

Products LiabilityIndustrial AccidentGranulator MachineDesign DefectFailure to WarnSummary JudgmentExpert TestimonyNip Point HazardV-belt DriveMachine Safety
References
32
Case No. ADJ7106696
Regular
Oct 09, 2012

JAMAL CLARK vs. SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered by CMS, NFL EUROPE, TIG INSURANCE, Administered by REM

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, *Jamal Clark v. Seattle Seahawks*, involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a July 16, 2012, award. The Board has granted this petition to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues presented. The Board believes this is necessary to thoroughly understand the record and render a just decision. Pending the Decision After Reconsideration, all filings must be submitted in writing directly to the Commissioners' office in San Francisco, not to district offices or through e-filing.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrdersStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management SystemVan Nuys District Office
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2000

Clarke v. One Source Facility Services, Inc.

This case concerns Sylvester Clarke's claims of employment discrimination and retaliatory discharge under Title VII against One Source Facility Services, Inc. Clarke, an African-American male, alleged discrimination stemming from a refusal of non-union work, which he claimed led to his removal from a position and a series of adverse employment actions. He pursued these grievances through union complaints and two administrative complaints with the New York State Division of Human Rights in 1996 and 1998. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant on the discrimination claim, finding a lack of evidence for racial animus. However, the court denied summary judgment on the retaliation claim, concluding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding a potential pattern of retaliatory conduct by the employer following Clarke's protected activities.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliatory DischargeTitle VIISummary JudgmentMcDonnell-Douglas FrameworkPrima Facie CasePretextRacial DiscriminationUnion GrievanceAdministrative Complaint
References
21
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 05131 [186 AD3d 1149]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 29, 2020

Matter of Clarke v. City of New York

Petitioner Adrianne Clarke sought to annul the New York City Transit Authority's (NYCTA) decision to deny her differential pay following a deep vein thrombosis (DVT) injury sustained during a work-related flight. The NYCTA denied the request, citing Clarke's late notification of the injury and the uncertainty surrounding whether her travel constituted a "workplace activity" for differential pay eligibility. The Supreme Court upheld the NYCTA's decision as rationally based, noting that traveling to work is generally not considered a workplace activity and Clarke had a personal history of DVT. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, finding no error in the denial of differential pay.

Differential PayDeep Vein ThrombosisWorkplace InjuryTimely NoticeAssigned DutyTravel TimeCPLR Article 78Appellate ReviewRational BasisWorkers' Compensation Benefits
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Clarke

The case involves the appeal of Brian Clarke's conviction for felony murder, robbery in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. The initial judgment sentenced him to 25 years to life for murder in the second degree. On appeal, the court found that the defendant received meaningful representation and the motion to vacate judgment was properly denied. However, the appellate court, exercising discretion in the interest of justice, reduced the sentence for murder in the second degree to a term of 15 years to life. This modification was based on factors such as it being the defendant's first offense, his below-average intelligence, and the jury's conviction solely on the felony-murder count. A dissenting opinion argued against the sentence reduction, highlighting the brutal nature of the crime—a cold-blooded execution during a robbery—and the defendant's background as an admitted drug dealer.

Criminal LawFelony MurderRobberyCriminal Possession of WeaponSentence ReductionAppellate ReviewProsecutorial MisconductSuppression MotionMeaningful RepresentationMental Capacity
References
9
Case No. 93-CV-1524
Regular Panel Decision

Clarke v. TRW, INC.

This case involves a whistleblower lawsuit filed by four former employees—Peter J. Clarke, Edward J. Dixon, Brian R. Fisher, and Paul J. Wheeler—against their former employer, TRW, Inc. The plaintiffs allege retaliation under New York's whistleblower law (N.Y.Lab.Law § 740) for reporting safety concerns related to defective automobile parts manufactured by TRW, specifically the Carter RFI Module and Ford ISO Relay. The alleged defects, which included improper testing and manufacturing flaws, presented a substantial danger of vehicle fires and loss of brake control. The court, addressing TRW's motion to dismiss and the plaintiffs' cross-motion to file a second amended complaint, ruled that the plaintiffs' claims based on violations of 49 U.S.C. §§ 30116 and 30118 were sufficiently pleaded to proceed. However, claims relying on 49 C.F.R. §§ 571.105, 571.301, and 49 U.S.C. §§ 30112, 30115, 30122 were dismissed as these regulations apply to finished vehicles, not component parts. The court also denied the plaintiffs' requests for punitive damages and a jury trial, citing that these are not available remedies under N.Y.Lab.Law § 740(5). Ultimately, the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied, and the plaintiffs were granted partial leave to amend their complaint within 45 days.

WhistleblowerRetaliationMotor Vehicle SafetyProduct LiabilityManufacturing DefectsComponent PartsFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureMotion to DismissMotion to AmendNTMVSA
References
45
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. 2018 NY Slip Op 02766 [160 AD3d 921]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2018

Clarke v. First Student, Inc.

Ibia M. Clarke, an employee of First Student Management, LLC (FSM), sustained personal injuries due to a defective condition at FSM's premises. She subsequently filed a negligence action against First Student, Inc., the premises owner. The defendant sought summary judgment, arguing it was an alter ego of FSM, making workers' compensation her exclusive remedy under the Workers' Compensation Law. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, initially denied the defendant's motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the Supreme Court's order, finding that the defendant successfully demonstrated, prima facie, that it was an alter ego of the plaintiff's employer, FSM. Consequently, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint was granted.

Personal InjuryNegligenceSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation LawExclusive RemedyAlter Ego DoctrineEmployer LiabilityPremises LiabilityAppellate ReviewCorporate Structure
References
9
Case No. ADJ7324566
Regular
Apr 09, 2013

BRANDON CLARK DECEASED, JOVELYN CLARK (WIDOW), GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR JOANNA CLARK (MINOR CHILD), BRITTANY CLARK (MINOR CHILD), BENJAMIN CLARK (MINOR CHILD) vs. SOUTH COAST FRAMING, INC., REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a death claim where the decedent, Brandon Clark, died from combined toxic effects of sedating drugs. The defense argued that industrially prescribed medications did not significantly contribute to the death, but the Board upheld the finding that the industrially prescribed amitriptyline was a contributing factor. The Board found ample evidence supported industrial causation, rejecting the defense's attempt to limit causation solely to non-industrial medications and their untimely raised claim of intentional overdose.

Death ClaimIndustrial InjuryReconsiderationWidows BenefitsMinor DependentsToxicologyDrug InteractionCausationExpert OpinionMedical Examiner
References
0
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07698 [189 AD3d 611]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2020

Clarke v. Empire Gen. Contr. & Painting Corp.

Plaintiff, Rohan Clarke, sustained personal injuries when he fell from a scaffold while dismantling it in an elevator shaft, leading to an action alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on liability for these claims. The court also granted Lough Allen Masonry's motion to dismiss common-law indemnification and contribution claims, and Pen & Brush, Inc.'s motion for contractual indemnification against Empire General Contracting & Painting Corp. Empire's motion to dismiss plaintiff's total and permanent disability claim was denied. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed these orders, finding that plaintiff was not the sole proximate cause or a recalcitrant worker. The appellate court also determined that Empire's contractual indemnification obligation to Pen & Brush was triggered and that plaintiff had not sustained a grave injury under Workers' Compensation Law § 11.

Scaffold Fall InjuryLabor Law ViolationsSummary Judgment MotionContractual IndemnityCommon-Law Indemnification DismissalGrave Injury DeterminationWorkers' Compensation LawPremises LiabilityConstruction Site SafetyThird-Party Action
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 102 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