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

In re Jennifer G.

The appellate court reversed a Family Court order that directed the petitioner to return children to their mother, Jennifer G., citing an imminent risk to the children's health due to the mother's admitted use of excessive corporal punishment. The court emphasized the children's need for stability and directed that they remain in their current home. Furthermore, the court mandated the appointment of a new Law Guardian and reassignment of the case to a different Family Court Judge, due to concerns about the previous Law Guardian's judgment and the Judge's disregard for the appellate court's prior remittitur.

child protective proceedingcorporal punishmentbest interests of the childLaw Guardianjudicial recusalremittiturFamily Courtparental rightschild welfareappellate court
References
7
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02043
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 24, 2022

Matter of Jennifer JJ. v. Jessica JJ.

This case involves an appeal by Jessica JJ. (biological mother) from a Family Court order that terminated her postadoption visitation rights with her son and daughter, who were adopted by Jennifer JJ. (adoptive mother). The biological mother had previously surrendered her parental rights under a postadoption contact agreement. The adoptive mother sought modification, citing significant behavioral issues in both children following visits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding the termination of visitation to be in the children's best interests. The Court noted severe behavioral outbursts in the son, who has autistic spectrum disorder, ADHD, and anxiety, after visits, and a persistent pattern of head banging and nightmares in the daughter correlated with visits. The decision emphasizes the 'best interests of the children' standard for enforcing postadoption contact agreements under Domestic Relations Law § 112-b (4). A dissenting opinion argued that there was insufficient evidence to terminate visitation for the daughter.

Postadoption contactVisitation modificationBest interests of the childParental rights surrenderFamily Court Act Article 6Appellate reviewChildren's behavioral issuesAutistic Spectrum DisorderADHDAnxiety disorder
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 1996

In re Jennifer WW.

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order extending the placement of respondent's children, Jennifer, Kathryn, and Edward, in petitioner's custody. The initial placement stemmed from respondent's admission of sexually abusing Jennifer, leading to her adjudication as abused and the other children as neglected. The Family Court granted an additional extension of the placement and supervision order, a decision affirmed by the appellate court. The court considered testimony regarding respondent's progress in sexual abuse treatment, his refusal to acknowledge the sexual nature of his conduct, and the high risk of re-abuse. The appellate court found no error in the Family Court's decision to extend the order, concluding that the appeal was not moot despite the initial order's expiration due to subsequent extensions.

Family LawChild AbuseChild NeglectPlacement ExtensionSexual Abuse TreatmentRisk AssessmentAppellate ReviewFamily Court ActMadison County
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coniglio v. Coniglio

This is a proceeding under New York's Uniform Support of Dependents Law (USDL) initiated to seek child support for Jennifer Coniglio from her father, the respondent. A hearing examiner initially recommended a bifurcated support order of $60 per week during the respondent's employment season and $25 per week during unemployment, based on his seasonal construction work. The respondent objected to these findings, challenging the court's jurisdiction due to a pre-existing divorce decree that included child support provisions. Judge Anthony F. Bonadio, referencing Lebedeff v Lebedeff and Nichols v Bardua, ruled that the USDL provides an additional remedy, not a modification, and affirmed the court's jurisdiction to determine support de novo, without being bound by the Supreme Court decree. Considering the approximate equal incomes of both parents, the court set a new support order for the respondent at $30 per week, to be paid through the support collection unit, and ordered him to maintain medical and dental insurance for Jennifer Coniglio as per the separation agreement.

Child Support EnforcementUniform Support of Dependents LawJurisdictional DisputeDe Novo DeterminationParental Financial ContributionSeasonal Employment IncomeUnemployment Benefits ConsiderationMedical Insurance ProvisionDivorce Decree InteractionSupport Collection Unit
References
5
Case No. ADJ3206000
Regular
Jun 27, 2014

JENNIFER HESTER vs. TECHNICOLOR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Jennifer Hester's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB found that Hester had already sought reconsideration and failed to prevail, and a subsequent petition is only permissible if new evidence is presented. Since no new evidence was submitted despite opportunities on the prior reconsideration, the WCAB dismissed the current petition. Therefore, the WCAB's prior decision, which affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that Technicolor's offer to pay for surgery per fee schedule satisfied its obligation, remains in effect.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationagreed medical evaluatorevidentiary hearingsuccessive petitionnewly aggrievedwrit of reviewnew evidencefee schedule
References
6
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04169
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 01, 2021

Matter of Derek KK. v. Jennifer KK.

The father appealed a Family Court order that dismissed his modification application, granted the mother sole custody with supervised visitation, and issued a stay-away order. The Appellate Division found a sound basis for the Family Court's determination of a change in circumstances and the children's best interests supporting sole custody and supervised visitation due to the parents' inability to co-parent and the father's harassing behavior. The court modified the order by changing a prerequisite for modifying visitation (father's enrollment in a parenting program) to a component of supervised visitation. Additionally, the Appellate Division affirmed the issuance of the stay-away order against the father, citing sufficient evidence of harassment and stalking. The court also upheld the Family Court's decision to not conduct a Lincoln hearing due to the children's young ages and the contentious family dynamics.

CustodyVisitationFamily OffenseOrder of ProtectionHarassmentStalkingParental AlienationBest Interests of the ChildChange in CircumstancesSupervised Visitation
References
21
Case No. ADJ7835148
Regular
May 27, 2014

JENNIFER BROWN vs. CITY OF FULLERTON POLICE DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding of an industrial back injury for applicant Jennifer Brown, a police officer. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which recommended denial and addressed the defendant's arguments concerning the injury type, witness credibility, sub rosa videos, lien reimbursement, and the scope of temporary disability benefits. The Board clarified that the parties should adjust temporary disability benefits and the CLEA lien, with jurisdiction reserved to the WCJ for resolution.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPolice OfficerCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryCredible WitnessSub Rosa VideosLien Claimant
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Merkel v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Plaintiff Jennifer Marie Merkel sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision denying her applications for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI). The case details a lengthy administrative history with multiple denials and remands. The central issue revolved around the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) evaluation of medical opinion evidence, particularly that of treating physician Dr. Capecci. The Court found the ALJ erred by not affording controlling weight to Dr. Capecci's opinion, especially concerning Plaintiff's need for four unscheduled absences per month, which a vocational expert testified would preclude all work. Consequently, the Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, the Commissioner's decision reversed, and the case remanded solely for the calculation and payment of benefits.

Social Security ActDisability Insurance BenefitsSupplemental Security IncomeFinal Decision ReviewAdministrative Law Judge (ALJ)Treating Physician RuleMedical Opinion EvidenceResidual Functional Capacity (RFC)Vocational Expert TestimonyRemand for Benefits
References
20
Case No. ADJ3374037 (POM 0295321)
Regular
Jan 23, 2012

JENNIFER COLLINS vs. AUTO ZONE/GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

This case concerns Jennifer Collins' petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge's (WCJ) decision that denied her claim for permanent disability and further medical treatment. The WCJ's decision was issued on October 13, 2010. Collins argued the decision was procured by fraud because her attorney, who represented her at trial, had been dismissed on October 5, 2010. However, the Appeals Board dismissed the petition as untimely, noting it was filed over a year after the WCJ's order. The Board found that Collins' new attorneys did not file the substitution of attorney form until November 2, 2010, well after the WCJ's decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderPanel Qualified Medical ReportIndustrial InjuryWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeClaim of FraudUntimely FilingDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedMandatory Settlement ConferenceStipulations
References
0
Case No. 17-CV-667-EAW
Regular Panel Decision

Nelson v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Plaintiff Jennifer Marie Nelson sought judicial review of a denial of disability insurance benefits by the Commissioner of Social Security. The U.S. District Court, Western District of New York, found that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred in assessing Plaintiff's Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) by failing to properly evaluate opinion evidence from a therapist and by substituting her own lay judgment for medical opinion. The ALJ also failed to develop the record by obtaining sufficient medical evidence relevant to the period of disability. The court granted Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings and remanded the case for further administrative proceedings, instructing the ALJ to reconsider the therapist's opinion and fully explain the basis for any RFC assessment.

Social Security ActDisability BenefitsALJ ErrorResidual Functional CapacityMedical Opinion EvidenceFunctional LimitationsRemandMental ImpairmentsConsultative ExaminationDistrict Court Review
References
16
Showing 1-10 of 81 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