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

United States v. Torres

Carlos Torres, charged with drug trafficking and firearms offenses, moved for reconsideration of his detention order, arguing that a key cooperating witness, Frederick Rolle, had been discredited. U.S. Magistrate Judge Payson had initially ordered Torres detained due to danger to the community, a decision affirmed by U.S. District Judge Larimer. Despite Rolle's testimony being discounted after he failed a lie detector test, Judge Payson maintained that the remaining evidence—including corroboration from a confidential informant, seized evidence from Torres's home (cocaine, shotgun, bulletproof vest, cash), and evidence of unexplained wealth—still strongly supported his detention. The court found that no conditions could adequately assure community safety if Torres were released. Therefore, Torres's motion for reconsideration was denied, and his detention was continued.

DetentionReconsiderationVacaturDanger to CommunityRisk of FlightDrug TraffickingFirearms OffenseCocaineConfidential InformantCooperating Witness
References
2
Case No. 532092
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 03, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Brandon Torres

Claimant Brandon Torres appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision from August 13, 2020, which denied his application for reconsideration and/or full Board review. Torres had initially filed for workers' compensation benefits alleging an occupational left hip injury, but a Workers' Compensation Law Judge disallowed the claim due to a lack of medical evidence, and Torres did not appeal that decision. The Board subsequently denied Torres' requests for reopening and his application for reconsideration, citing his failure to comply with proof of service requirements under 12 NYCRR 300.13 (b) (2). The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board did not abuse its discretion or act arbitrarily and capriciously, as Torres, a party in interest, improperly served the employer's carrier himself.

Workers' CompensationOccupational InjuryHip InjuryProof of ServiceAdministrative ReviewReconsiderationBoard ReviewAppellate DivisionArbitrary and CapriciousAbuse of Discretion
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Torres v. City of New York

Wilfredo Torres, a former New York City Department of Corrections (DOC) officer, filed a complaint against the City of New York and several DOC officials. Torres alleged that DOC’s sick leave policy was unconstitutional and asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment violations, along with state law claims for medical malpractice, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring and retention. After the court initially dismissed some claims, Torres later dismissed all federal claims except for equal protection and requested remand of state claims. The court, declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, dismissed Torres’s Equal Protection Claim with prejudice and the remaining state law claims without prejudice.

Corrections OfficerSick Leave PolicyConstitutional Law42 U.S.C. § 1983First AmendmentFourth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentEqual ProtectionMedical MalpracticeIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
References
7
Case No. ADJ10679914
Regular
Mar 05, 2018

Juan Torres vs. Ganalix Plumbing Repair, Uninsured Employers Benefit Trust Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the administrative law judge's decision, finding that applicant Juan Torres sustained a back injury arising out of and occurring during the course of employment with Ganalix Plumbing Repair. The Board disagreed with the judge's finding of no injury based solely on applicant's credibility, noting that three defense witnesses corroborated an event occurred, and medical records documented back pain shortly after the fall. The Board also acknowledged applicant's delay in reporting and the employer's lack of workers' compensation insurance, but ultimately found sufficient evidence for a compensable back injury.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDJuan TorresGANALIX PLUMBING REPAIRUNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFIT TRUST FUNDFindings and OrderPetition for Reconsiderationadministrative law judgeWCJinjury arising out of and occurring during the course of employmentLabor Code section 5402(b)
References
2
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00704 [202 AD3d 1177]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 03, 2022

Matter of Torres v. C & S Wholesale

Brandon Torres, a claimant, appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that denied his application for reconsideration and/or full Board review. Previously, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge had found no medical evidence of a work-related injury, disallowing the claim. The Board denied reconsideration due to Torres's failure to comply with proof of service requirements under 12 NYCRR 300.13 (b) (2). The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board did not abuse its discretion, as Torres, despite being represented by counsel, personally served the employer's carrier, violating the rule that a party in interest cannot effectuate service.

Workers' CompensationAppealReconsideration DeniedProof of ServiceOccupational InjuryAdministrative ReviewAbuse of DiscretionThird DepartmentAppellate DivisionBoard Review
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Torres v. Astrue

Orlando Torres, the plaintiff, initiated this action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) to challenge the final determination by the Commissioner of Social Security, which found him not disabled and thus ineligible for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. Plaintiff had previously filed applications in 2004, alleging disability due to various impairments, which were denied by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and subsequently by the Appeals Council. Both parties filed motions for judgment on the pleadings. The court, reviewing the ALJ's five-step disability evaluation process and the substantial evidence standard, ultimately concluded that the ALJ's determination was supported by sufficient evidence. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion was granted, the plaintiff's motion was denied, and the complaint was dismissed, upholding the finding that Orlando Torres is not disabled.

Social Security ActDisability BenefitsSupplemental Security IncomeAdministrative Law JudgeResidual Functional CapacityTreating Physician RuleSubstantial Evidence ReviewBack ImpairmentSpondylolisthesisChronic Pain
References
25
Case No. CA 10-02273
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 07, 2011

MAZURETT, JUAN v. ROCHESTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

The plaintiffs, Juan Mazurett and Theresa Mazurett, commenced a Labor Law and common-law negligence action against the Rochester City School District after Juan Mazurett was injured in a fall from a collapsing scaffold at a construction site. The accident occurred while he was attempting to climb the scaffold provided by his employer, the general contractor. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) and partially denied the defendant's cross motion for summary judgment. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the plaintiffs established a prima facie violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) due to the scaffold's collapse. The court rejected the defendant's argument that the plaintiff's conduct was the sole proximate cause of the accident, finding no evidence that the plaintiff refused to use available safety devices.

Personal InjuryScaffold AccidentLabor Law ViolationConstruction Site SafetyProximate CauseSummary Judgment MotionAppellate ReviewWorker SafetyStatutory DutyNew York Law
References
11
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08467 [156 AD3d 410]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 05, 2017

Torres v. Love Lane Mews, LLC

In this appellate case, Hilarion Torres, a construction worker, was allegedly injured by falling bricks at a construction site involving Love Lane Mews, LLC and Red Hook Construction Group-I, LLC. The Supreme Court initially denied Torres's motion for partial summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, dismissed Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims against Red Hook, and dismissed the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim. It also granted Love Lane's motion for contractual indemnification against third-party defendant Galaxy General Contracting Corp. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified the Supreme Court's order, reinstating the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims against Red Hook due to unresolved factual issues regarding Red Hook's control over the injury-producing work. All other aspects of the Supreme Court's decision were affirmed.

Construction AccidentFalling ObjectsLabor LawSummary Judgment MotionContractual IndemnificationVicarious LiabilityAppellate Division First DepartmentBronx County Supreme CourtDemolition WorkWorkplace Safety
References
5
Case No. CV-24-0601
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Juan Duta-Zumba

In July 2022, claimant Juan Duta-Zumba filed a workers' compensation claim for injuries sustained in a ladder fall while working for Level 5 Carpentry. The employer and its carrier, Urban Atelier Group, LLC and SiriusPoint America Insurance, controverted the claim, disputing employment. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) credited claimant's testimony, establishing Level 5 Carpentry as the employer and confirming work-related injuries. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed this decision. The carrier appealed, contending the accident was unwitnessed and their due process rights were violated. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's findings regarding the accident and injuries, and that the carrier received adequate due process.

Workers' CompensationLadder FallWork-Related InjuryCredibility DeterminationDue ProcessStatutory PresumptionAppellate ReviewEmployment DisputeMedical EvidenceThird Judicial Department
References
14
Case No. 533094
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Juan Bidot

Juan A. Bidot, a probation officer, filed an occupational disease claim for workers' compensation benefits, alleging he developed posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression due to prolonged exposure to sex offenders. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge established the claim. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, disallowing the claim because Bidot failed to demonstrate that his psychological stress was greater than that experienced by similarly situated officers. Bidot appealed the Board's denial of his request for reconsideration and/or full Board review. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding no abuse of discretion as Bidot failed to present newly discovered evidence or a material change in condition.

Occupational DiseasePosttraumatic Stress DisorderPTSDMental HealthWorkers' Compensation ClaimAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionReconsideration ApplicationBoard ReviewProbation Officer
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 425 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