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. ADJ9398564
Regular
Jun 12, 2018

JEROME POLAND vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The applicant, Jerome Poland, filed a Petition for Reconsideration without his attorney in response to a notice of intention to disallow his claim. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) subsequently issued an "Order Vacating Submission" in response to this petition. Citing WCAB Rule 10859, which allows a WCJ to amend or rescind a decision within fifteen days of a reconsideration petition, the Board dismissed the applicant's petition. This dismissal was based on the WCJ's action in vacating submission within the allowable timeframe.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationNotice of Intention to DisallowWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeOrder Vacating SubmissionWCAB Rule 10859Amend or ModifyRescindFurther ProceedingsDismissed Petition
References
1
Case No. CA 12-01577
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2013

MEABON, GRANT v. TOWN OF POLAND

Plaintiff Grant Meabon filed a Labor Law and common-law negligence action after sustaining injuries while working on a pole barn for the Town of Poland, an employee of Sherwood A. Chapman d/b/a Cadillac Carpentry. The Town of Poland sought contractual indemnification from Cadillac Carpentry. Initially, the Supreme Court granted partial summary judgment to the Town. However, the Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that the indemnification contract was executed after the accident and lacked retroactive intent. Consequently, the court denied the Town's motion and granted Cadillac's cross-motion for summary judgment, dismissing the third-party complaint.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentRetroactive ContractWorkers' Compensation LawLabor LawCommon Law NegligenceThird Party ActionAppealAppellate DivisionEmployer Liability
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 14, 2012

Meabon v. Town of Poland

Plaintiff initiated a Labor Law and common-law negligence action against the Town of Poland for injuries sustained during pole barn construction. The Town of Poland, as a third-party plaintiff, sought contractual indemnification from third-party defendant Cadillac Carpentry, the plaintiff's employer. The Supreme Court initially granted partial summary judgment for the Town on indemnification and denied Cadillac's cross-motion. On appeal, the higher court reversed this decision. It found that the indemnification contract between the Town and Cadillac was executed after the accident and lacked retroactive intent, thus precluding indemnification under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. Consequently, the Town's motion for partial summary judgment was denied, and Cadillac's cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint was granted.

Contractual IndemnificationThird-Party ActionWorkers' Compensation Law § 11Summary JudgmentRetroactive ContractLabor LawCommon-Law NegligencePole Barn ConstructionSlip and FallAppellate Decision
References
9
Case No. 533436
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Jerome Hernandez

Claimant, Jerome Hernandez, a sheet metal worker, was laid off in February 2008 and subsequently became seriously ill, diagnosed with conditions including a pulmonary embolism and asbestosis due to work exposure. He retired in August 2008. After initial disallowance and a reversal by the Workers' Compensation Board establishing his claim for asbestosis, the case proceeded to determine benefits. The employer and its carrier (AABCO Sheet Metal et al.) appealed the Board's decision affirming a permanent partial disability classification and an award of wage loss benefits. The carrier argued voluntary withdrawal from the labor market and lack of labor market attachment. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that the claimant's retirement was motivated by his medical conditions, not the layoff, thus rendering his withdrawal involuntary. The Court also found no error in the Board's determination that the claimant was not required to demonstrate labor market attachment for the specified period, as the issue was not properly raised or evidence not required until later.

AsbestosisLabor Market AttachmentVoluntary WithdrawalWage Loss BenefitsPermanent Partial DisabilityAppellate DivisionWorkers' Compensation Board AppealCausation (Medical)Occupational DiseaseClaimant Rights
References
13
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08637 [156 AD3d 463]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 12, 2017

Matter of Michelle C. v. Jerome Alvin M.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Family Court order that granted a mother's motion to deny her incarcerated ex-husband in-person visitation with their child at his correctional facility. The father, serving a 30-year sentence for attempted murder, appealed the decision. The court found that in-person visitation would be detrimental to the child's welfare due to the child's severe special needs, including hydrocephalus, developmental delays, and behavioral issues. Additionally, the six-hour travel distance and the father's lack of understanding of the child's condition were factors. The court modified the order to allow the father to maintain contact through letters, phone calls, and video communication.

Child welfareVisitation rightsParental incarcerationSpecial needs childModification of orderBest interests of the childCorrectional facility visitationFamily lawAppellate reviewParental rights
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Pollock

This case concerns a joint motion for declaratory judgment filed by Jerome Pollock, Jr. Stone Artist, Inc., a Chapter 11 debtor, and the New York State Department of Labor (DOL). Stone Artist contended that a DOL Order to Comply, issued due to alleged unpaid overtime wages, violated the automatic stay in bankruptcy. The DOL argued its action was permissible under the police and regulatory powers exception of 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4). The court analyzed the applicability of the police powers exception using both the pecuniary purpose and public policy tests. It concluded that the DOL's enforcement action to fix damages for labor law violations satisfied both tests, and an explicit demand for injunctive relief was not required. Consequently, the court ruled that the DOL's issuance of the Order to Comply was properly excepted from the automatic stay.

BankruptcyAutomatic StayPolice Powers ExceptionDeclaratory JudgmentLabor LawOvertime WagesGovernmental EnforcementPecuniary TestPublic Policy TestNew York Labor Law
References
17
Case No. ADJ8786339
Regular
Aug 01, 2017

JEROME ANCRUM vs. WILLIAM TRANSPORTATION, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, AIG

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Jerome Ancrum's Petition for Removal in Case No. ADJ8786339. The Board found that Ancrum failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, removal, an extraordinary remedy, was not granted. The Board adopted and incorporated the WCJ's report in its decision.

Petition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJ ReportAdopt and IncorporateDeniedAppeals BoardWorkers' Compensation
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kantha v. Blue

Plaintiff Maria Munoz Kantha sued Jerome Blue, Evonne Jennings Tolbert, and three unnamed New York state officials, alleging gender discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment and retaliation for protected speech under the First Amendment and New York Executive Law § 296(6). Blue and Tolbert moved for summary judgment on all claims against them. The court denied Blue's motion, finding sufficient evidence of retaliatory animus and gender-based disparate treatment to proceed to trial, and that he was not entitled to qualified immunity. However, Tolbert's motion was granted, as the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence of Tolbert's personal involvement or causal connection between Kantha's speech and her termination. Consequently, the claims against Tolbert were dismissed, while those against Blue will proceed.

Summary JudgmentFirst AmendmentRetaliation ClaimGender DiscriminationEqual ProtectionPublic EmployeeQualified ImmunityHostile Work EnvironmentDisparate TreatmentNew York Executive Law
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cromwell v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Plaintiff Jerome Cromwell sued the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (HHC) and its CEO, Alan D. Aviles, alleging unpaid wages for work performed before and after scheduled shifts and during breaks. Cromwell sought overtime and gap-time pay under both the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL). Defendants moved to dismiss the NYLL claims, asserting that HHC is a political subdivision of New York State and therefore exempt from NYLL wage provisions. The Court conducted a particularized inquiry into HHC's nature, considering its essential public function, substantial public funding, and classification as a public employer under other state and federal laws. Ultimately, the Court granted the defendants' motion, ruling that HHC is a political subdivision for NYLL purposes and dismissing Cromwell's NYLL claims with prejudice.

Wage disputeOvertime payGap-time payFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawPolitical subdivisionPublic employerMotion to dismissGovernmental immunityPublic benefit corporation
References
25
Case No. ADJ6990080
Regular
Jan 04, 2012

JEROME ALLEN vs. MILWAUKEE BUCKS, DALLAS MAVERICKS, CLEVELAND CAVALIERS, DENVER NUGGETS, INDIANA PACERS, MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES, TIG INSURANCE As Administered By RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT (For All Teams)

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves applicant Jerome Allen against several NBA teams and their insurer. The Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. This reconsideration is for further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future communications in this matter should be directed to the Board's Office of the Commissioners.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationFactual and Legal IssuesStatutory Time ConstraintsFurther ProceedingsDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersAlfonso J. MoresiFrank M. Brass
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 29 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