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. No. 47
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 20, 2017

Michael J. Carlson, Sr. v. American International Group, Inc.

A jury awarded Michael Carlson $20 million following his wife's death in an accident involving an MVP truck driven by William Porter. The Appellate Division later reduced the judgment and dismissed claims against DHL. Carlson then sued DHL's insurers, National Union and AAIC, under Insurance Law § 3420, arguing the MVP vehicle qualified as a "hired auto" and that the policies were "issued or delivered" in New York. While the Supreme Court initially allowed the claims, the Appellate Division reversed both, finding no "hired auto" coverage and that the policies were not "issued or delivered" in New York. The Court of Appeals reinstated Carlson's claims against the insurers, holding that the "hired auto" issue presented a question of fact and that "issued or delivered" in Insurance Law § 3420 applies to policies covering insureds and risks within New York. The court, however, affirmed the dismissal of Carlson's other claims for fraud, bad faith, General Business Law violations, and conspiracy.

Insurance CoverageHired AutoInsurance Policy InterpretationRespondeat SuperiorIndependent ContractorVehicle and Traffic LawInsurance Law § 3420Automobile AccidentLiability InsurancePersonal Injury
References
68
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 06625
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2018

Matter of Kenneth J. v. Lesley B.

The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed a Family Court order that suspended all visitation and contact between a father, Kenneth J., and his child. The Family Court had granted summary judgment to the mother, Lesley B., without a hearing. The Appellate Division found this improper, emphasizing that modification of custody or visitation requires a hearing, except in emergencies. The court further ruled that the Family Court improperly considered unsworn, uncertified, and hearsay reports and letters from mental health services and therapists, which were inadmissible and did not justify the drastic measure of suspending parental contact. The matter was remanded, and the father's petitions for enforcement and modification were restored, along with the mother's petition.

Family LawCustodyVisitationSummary JudgmentDue ProcessIn Camera InterviewAdmissibility of EvidenceHearsayForensic EvaluationChild's Best Interests
References
6
Case No. ADJ9329165
Regular
Nov 09, 2014

JANA CARLSON (Deceased) KENNETH CARLSON (Widower) vs. CONTINENTAL VINEYARDS, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns a petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award for the death of Jana Carlson. The defendants contest the award of maximum death benefits, arguing the decedent's earnings were stipulated as minimum, and challenge the dependency of a foster child without a presumption. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to defer determination of the foster child's dependency and the rate of benefits under Labor Code section 4703.5, but affirmed the WCJ's findings on other issues, including the appointment of the widower as guardian ad litem.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJana CarlsonKenneth CarlsonContinental VineyardsEmployers Compensation Insurance CompanyADJ9329165Findings and AwardReconsiderationDependency BenefitsLabor Code Section 4703.5
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gottlieb v. Kenneth D. Laub & Co.

This case examines whether Labor Law § 198 (1-a), which grants attorney’s fees in wage claims, applies broadly to all wage claims or is restricted to violations of Labor Law article 6. Plaintiff Seymour Gottlieb, a former real estate salesman, sought unpaid commissions from Kenneth D. Laub & Company, asserting a common-law contract claim and a violation of Labor Law § 198. The lower courts awarded attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, ruling that the attorney’s fees and liquidated damages remedies under Labor Law § 198 (1-a) are exclusively for wage claims based on substantive violations of Labor Law article 6. The Court emphasized that the statute’s plain language, legislative history, and purpose, along with common-law principles against awarding attorney’s fees, limit its applicability to claims arising directly from article 6.

Labour LawWage ClaimAttorney's FeesLiquidated DamagesContract ClaimStatutory InterpretationLegislative IntentCommon LawArticle 6Employment Law
References
6
Case No. 535098
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2023

In the Matter of the Claim of Kenneth Attreed

The claimant, Kenneth Attreed, sustained knee injuries at work and filed for workers' compensation benefits. Initially, a WCLJ established the claim and granted temporary total and partial disability awards. Following a subsequent hearing where the employer's carrier raised issues of voluntary withdrawal and lack of labor market attachment, the Workers' Compensation Board modified the WCLJ's determination, finding that the claimant voluntarily removed himself from the labor market and thus had no compensable lost time from September 28, 2021, onward. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, modified the Board's decision, agreeing that the claimant's withdrawal was voluntary but finding that the Board erred in determining the start date of no labor market attachment. The court ruled that the applicable date should be October 25, 2021, when the claimant testified, not September 27, 2021, when the issue was raised. The matter was remitted to the Board to address eligibility for indemnity benefits subsequent to the claimant's October 20, 2021, surgery.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsVoluntary Withdrawal from Labor MarketLabor Market AttachmentTemporary Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityAppellate DivisionThird Judicial DepartmentClaimant AppealIndemnity BenefitsKnee Injury
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carlson v. Geneva City School District

Plaintiff Catherine Carlson, a Media Library Specialist, filed suit against the Geneva City School District and several individual employees, alleging sexual harassment by Principal David D. Pullen and subsequent retaliation by all defendants when she complained. Her claims included violations of Title VII, ADA, FMLA, NYHRL, defamation, slander, libel, prima facie tort, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The alleged retaliation involved false accusations, administrative leave, new work restrictions, negative performance evaluations, and reassignment to a less desirable position. Defendants moved to dismiss or for summary judgment. The court granted the motion in part and denied in part, dismissing some state-law claims due to notice non-compliance or being time-barred, and dismissing Title VII and ADA claims against individual defendants. Plaintiff was granted leave to amend certain remaining claims.

Sexual HarassmentRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentTitle VIIADAFMLANYHRLDefamationSlanderLibel
References
51
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 02366 [227 AD3d 406]
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 2024

Matter of Carlson v. New York City Council

This case concerns a hybrid CPLR article 78/declaratory judgment proceeding initiated by Christina Carlson and others against the New York City Council and the New York City School Construction Authority (SCA). The Supreme Court had annulled SCA's negative declaration for a proposed school development, remanding for an environmental impact statement (EIS). The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed this decision, denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. The court concluded that despite misclassifying the project as 'unlisted' instead of 'Type I' under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), the SCA nonetheless conducted an equivalent Type I review, fulfilling the 'hard look' requirement for potential environmental impacts. Therefore, the misclassification did not necessitate annulling the negative declaration.

Environmental ReviewSEQRANegative DeclarationEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS)Type I ActionUnlisted ActionMisclassificationJudicial ReviewAppellate DivisionSchool Construction Project
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 14, 1997

In re Sadie K.

The petitioner sought to terminate the respondent's parental rights due to permanent neglect of his three children, Sadie, Kenneth, and Christina. Family Court found that the respondent had sexually abused Christina and neglected Sadie and Kenneth, ordering his participation in various therapeutic programs, including a sex-offender program. Despite the petitioner's diligent efforts to reunite the family, the respondent failed to meaningfully participate, particularly by denying the sexual abuse, not engaging in the sex-offender program, and failing to maintain contact with his children. The Family Court terminated parental rights for Sadie and Kenneth (Christina had reached the age of majority). The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision, concluding that clear and convincing evidence supported the finding that the petitioner made diligent efforts and the respondent failed to plan for the children's future.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationSexual Abuse DenialChild Welfare AgencyFamily Court OrderAppellate AffirmationDiligent EffortsParent-Child ReunificationSex Offender ProgramParenting Skills
References
9
Case No. ADJ4386714 (RIV 0021250)
Regular
Apr 04, 2011

Clifford Carlson vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Clifford Carlson's petition for reconsideration of a decision that found the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) complied with a prior award and was not liable for penalties. Carlson had alleged the MTA failed to make timely disability payments, sought over 100 penalties, and claimed the judge's findings were fraudulent and unsupported by evidence. The Board also denied the MTA's petition for sanctions against Carlson, finding his conduct, though arguably aggressive, did not rise to the level of bad faith as defined by statute.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClifford CarlsonLos Angeles County Metropolitan Transit AuthorityPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderPenaltiesLabor Code section 4650Timely Disability PaymentsCredit for Permanent Disability PaymentsSanctions
References
0
Case No. ADJ13262420
Regular
Oct 20, 2025

JOSE MORALES vs. KENNETH C. RAY, COMPASS DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION, INC., BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted defendant Kenneth C. Ray's petition for reconsideration of an Amended Findings and Award (F&A) issued by a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on July 15, 2025. The original F&A had found that applicant Jose Morales was employed by Kenneth C. Ray and sustained an industrial injury but was not employed by Barrett Business Services, Inc. The Board rescinded the F&A and substituted a new F&A, affirming Morales's employment by Kenneth C. Ray and not by BBSI. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings under a new WCJ to determine issues regarding employment with Compass Development and Construction Inc., the participation of the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund, and the specific body parts injured.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Findings and Awardarising out of and in the course of employmentemploymentliabilitythird-party administratorsubstantial evidencecausationdeposition testimony
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 178 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