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

Mosher v. St. Joseph's Villa

Dennis B. Mosher was injured when he fell from a ladder while clearing land for the construction of a parking lot and building owned by St. Joseph’s Villa. He and his wife filed an action against St. Joseph’s Villa and Seneca Roadways, Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240, and 241. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action against both defendants and the negligence cause of action against St. Joseph’s Villa. On appeal, the order was modified. The Appellate Court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against St. Joseph’s Villa, determining that tree removal was incidental to construction. However, the dismissal of the common-law negligence claim against St. Joseph’s Villa and the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Seneca Roadways was affirmed, as St. Joseph’s Villa did not supervise the work and Seneca Roadways was not an owner or responsible contractor.

Ladder FallSite PreparationConstruction AccidentSummary JudgmentLabor Law § 240(1)Owner LiabilityContractor LiabilityCommon-Law NegligenceAppellate ReviewPremises Liability
References
10
Case No. 2014 NY Slip Op 05293 [119 AD3d 718]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 16, 2014

Caiazzo v. Mark Joseph Contracting, Inc.

Ronald Caiazzo, Jr. sued Mark Joseph Contracting, Inc., Julia Coen, and Ana Reyes for personal injuries sustained while installing an air conditioning system at a house owned by Julia Coen. Caiazzo fell from a makeshift step, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), 241(6) and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment dismissing certain claims. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6) claims against Mark Joseph Contracting, Inc., and Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) claims against Julia Coen, citing the homeowner exemption for Coen. However, the court reversed the denial of summary judgment to Mark Joseph Contracting, Inc. on the common-law negligence claim, granting dismissal. The denial of summary judgment for Julia Coen on Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence was affirmed, as triable issues of fact remained regarding her notice of a dangerous condition.

Personal InjuryLabor LawConstruction SiteSummary JudgmentCommon-law NegligenceElevated Work SiteDangerous ConditionHomeowner ExemptionAppellate ReviewSuffolk County
References
25
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00922 [202 AD3d 1243]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2022

Matter of Joseph v. Historic Hudson Val. Inc.

Cathleen Joseph sustained work-related injuries in August 2017 and was subsequently laid off in February 2018. Her claim for workers' compensation benefits was established for various conditions, including postconcussion syndrome. Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found her attached to the labor market, the Workers' Compensation Board modified this decision, ruling that Joseph failed to demonstrate an attachment and rescinded awarded benefits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's determination. The court found substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion that Joseph did not actively participate in job location services or conduct a diligent, independent job search within her medical restrictions.

Workers' CompensationLabor Market AttachmentMedical RestrictionsVocational RehabilitationDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceJob SearchWorkers' Compensation BoardPostconcussion Syndrome
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pereira v. St. Joseph's Cemetery

The plaintiff, a cemetery worker named Pereira, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Westchester County, which dismissed his personal injury complaint against St. Joseph’s Cemetery, Church of St. Joseph, and the Archdiocese of New York, based on res judicata. Pereira had previously filed a similar action alleging intentional tort, but it was dismissed on appeal because the allegations did not meet the intentional tort exception to Workers' Compensation Law § 29. In the current second action, Pereira rephrased his intentional tort allegations, and the defendants again moved to dismiss, this time citing res judicata, which the Supreme Court granted. The appellate court reversed the Supreme Court's decision, ruling that a prior dismissal for failure to state a cause of action is generally not on the merits and therefore does not trigger the doctrine of res judicata. Consequently, the appellate court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss, allowing the plaintiff's second action to proceed.

Personal InjuryRes JudicataWorkers' Compensation LawIntentional TortMotion to DismissFailure to State a Cause of ActionAppellate ReversalPrior DismissalOn the MeritsCemetery Worker
References
6
Case No. 532739
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Cathleen Joseph

Cathleen Joseph appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision which found she failed to demonstrate attachment to the labor market after a work-related injury in August 2017. After being laid off in February 2018, her subsequent claim for benefits was established, and a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found her attached to the labor market. However, the Board modified this decision, rescinding benefits. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that Joseph did not actively participate in job location services or conduct a diligent independent job search within her medical restrictions, despite her efforts to contact vocational programs.

Workers' CompensationLabor Market AttachmentTemporary Partial DisabilityMedical RestrictionsJob SearchSubstantial EvidenceAppellate DivisionWorkers' Compensation BoardPro SeConcussion Syndrome
References
6
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07876 [189 AD3d 1384]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2020

Joseph v. 210 W. 18th, LLC

The plaintiff, Thadeus Joseph, appealed an order denying his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). Joseph was injured after falling from an A-frame ladder while working in an apartment undergoing renovation. The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied his motion, finding that the mere fact of falling from a ladder, without evidence of a defective or inadequately secured ladder, was insufficient to establish a prima facie case under Labor Law § 240 (1). The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, agreeing that the plaintiff's testimony that the ladder shook, without evidence of it moving out of position or being an inadequate safety device, did not meet the burden for summary judgment.

Personal InjuryA-frame ladderFall from heightConstruction SiteWorker SafetySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewNegligenceLiabilityElevated Work Sites
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Giglio v. St. Joseph Intercommunity Hospital

Plaintiff Carl R. Giglio sustained injuries after slipping and falling in a stairwell at a construction site. Plaintiffs initiated an action against the site owner, St. Joseph Intercommunity Hospital, and the general contractor, Ciminelli-Cowper Co., Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6). Ciminelli subsequently impleaded C.I.R. Electrical Construction Corp., the plaintiff's employer, seeking contribution and indemnification. The Supreme Court initially denied motions to dismiss the Labor Law claims and the common-law negligence cause of action. However, the appellate court modified the order by denying the defendants' cross motions for conditional contractual and common-law indemnification against C.I.R., citing a lack of a direct claim by St. Joseph and the presence of triable issues of fact concerning Ciminelli's negligence, C.I.R.'s active fault, and whether plaintiff sustained a 'grave injury' under Workers' Compensation Law § 11.

Labor LawConstruction Site AccidentSummary JudgmentCommon-Law NegligenceContractual IndemnificationCommon-Law IndemnificationThird-Party ClaimWorkers' Compensation LawDangerous ConditionPremises Liability
References
18
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 00218 [157 AD3d 1116]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 11, 2018

Matter of Joseph v. Atelier Consulting LLC

Claimant Brad Joseph, a construction worker, sought workers' compensation benefits after fracturing his foot while working at a construction site, naming George Villar/Atelier Consulting LLC as his employer. An investigation revealed Atelier was exempt from coverage and lacked workers' compensation insurance at the time of the accident. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge determined an employer-employee relationship existed between Atelier and Joseph, holding Omega Construction Group, Inc., the general contractor, responsible for awards and imposing a $36,000 penalty on Atelier for failing to secure insurance. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed this decision. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the employer-employee relationship and no error in the Board's refusal to consider an affidavit from Villar.

Workers' CompensationEmployer-Employee RelationshipConstruction AccidentInsurance CoveragePenalty ImpositionSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewAffidavit AdmissibilityCross-Examination RightsGeneral Contractor Liability
References
5
Case No. CV-23-2165
Regular Panel Decision
May 08, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Joseph Coyle \[Michael Coyle (dec'd)\]

In 2016, Michael Coyle established a workers' compensation claim for work-related injuries and was later classified with a permanent partial disability. Following his death in January 2021, his minor son, Joseph Coyle, sought and was granted his father's unpaid wage-loss benefits, based on the precedent set by *Matter of Green v Dutchess County BOCES*. However, in October 2022, the Court of Appeals reversed *Green*, ruling against the posthumous transfer of unaccrued nonschedule awards. Consequently, the employer and its carrier requested to reopen the claim and suspend payments to Joseph Coyle. While a WCLJ initially reopened the claim, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, denying the reopening and continuing benefit payments. The carrier appealed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing the carrier's failure to seek administrative review of the initial WCLJ decision and finding no abuse of the Board's discretion.

Workers' Compensation AppealPosthumous Wage-loss BenefitsClaim ReopeningAdministrative DiscretionFinality of WCLJ DecisionCourt of Appeals PrecedentGreen v Dutchess County BOCESPermanent Partial DisabilityUnaccrued BenefitsAbuse of Discretion Standard
References
13
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02405
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 24, 2025

Joseph Chen, Inc. v. Romona Keveza Collection LLC

This case, Joseph Chen, Inc. v Romona Keveza Collection LLC, addresses the application of the Freelance Isn't Free Act (FIFA) in New York. Plaintiffs Joseph Chen Inc., a photographer's company, and Dina Kozlovska, a fashion model, sought compensation from Romona Keveza Collection LLC (RKC) for unpaid services. The initial Supreme Court order, which denied both parties' motions for summary judgment, was appealed. The Appellate Division clarified that Chen Inc. qualified as a freelance worker under FIFA, even when utilizing assistants, and Kozlovska's prior agency involvement did not negate her freelance status. Consequently, the court modified the lower court's decision, granting the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on liability against RKC, thereby affirming their rights under the Freelance Isn't Free Act.

Freelance Isn't Free ActIndependent ContractorSummary JudgmentAdministrative CodeUnpaid ServicesSingle-Person OrganizationAppellate DivisionLiabilityStatutory InterpretationFashion Industry
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 468 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