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. 2023 NY Slip Op 00704 [213 AD3d 1050]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 2023

Matter of Paka (Same Day Delivery Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)

The case involves Jacques Paka, a delivery driver, who applied for unemployment insurance benefits after working for Same Day Delivery Inc. The Department of Labor initially determined Paka was an employee, making Same Day liable for contributions. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board initially overruled this, finding Paka to be an independent contractor. However, upon reconsideration requested by the Commissioner of Labor, the Board rescinded its prior decision and sustained the Department's original determination, finding an employment relationship. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, rejecting Same Day's arguments against the reopening of the case and finding substantial evidence to support the Board's conclusion that Same Day exercised sufficient control over Paka to establish an employment relationship. The Court also affirmed that these findings apply to similarly situated individuals.

Unemployment InsuranceIndependent ContractorEmployment RelationshipControl TestAppellate ReviewUnemployment Insurance Appeal BoardLabor LawUnemployment BenefitsDelivery DriverSubstantial Evidence
References
11
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 06401 [199 AD3d 1181]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2021

Matter of Ciotoli (Commissioner of Labor)

Camille P. Ciotoli, operating Baked by Camille, appealed two decisions from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board had assessed Ciotoli for additional unemployment insurance contributions, finding that her daughter and other family and friends were undeclared employees during an audit period. Ciotoli's subsequent request for reopening and reconsideration was denied. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decisions, ruling that substantial evidence supported the finding of employment, based on Ciotoli's admissions, social media posts, and tax records. The court also upheld the assessment amount, noting the Commissioner of Labor's authority to determine contributions when an employer fails to file returns, pursuant to Labor Law § 571.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployer LiabilityEmployee MisclassificationPayroll AuditAdministrative AppealSubstantial EvidenceLabor Law ComplianceTax ContributionsCredibility
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Baywood Electric Corp. v. New York State Department of Labor

Baywood Electric Corporation, an electrical contractor, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a final order from the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor. The Commissioner had determined that Baywood willfully violated Labor Law § 220 by failing to pay prevailing wages and supplements on a public works contract with the Town of Babylon, imposing back wages, interest, a civil penalty, and debarment. Baywood contended its due process rights were violated by the denial of an adjournment for the administrative hearing and that the willfulness finding lacked substantial evidence. The reviewing court rejected these arguments, affirming the Commissioner's determination and dismissing Baywood's proceeding, finding ample opportunity for counsel and substantial evidence of willful violation based on Baywood's experience and prior similar conduct.

public worksprevailing wage lawLabor Law § 220CPLR article 78due processadministrative lawwillful violationelectrical contractorcivil penaltydebarment
References
8
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 02200 [193 AD3d 1199]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 08, 2021

Matter of Mayo (Epstein--Commissioner of Labor)

Geraldine M. Mayo filed a claim for unemployment insurance benefits after her employment as a property manager for Stephen P. Epstein, a court-appointed receiver, concluded. The Department of Labor initially determined that Mayo was an employee of Epstein in his capacity as receiver, a finding upheld by an Administrative Law Judge and the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision. The court found substantial evidence to support the finding of an employer-employee relationship, noting Epstein's control over Mayo's tasks, the need for his approval for significant management decisions, and his handling of property expenses. The court also rejected Epstein's argument that deeming a receiver an employer impinged upon judicial authority or public policy, citing Labor Law § 512 (1).

Unemployment Insurance BenefitsEmployer-Employee RelationshipReceiver LiabilityProperty ManagementAdministrative LawAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceJudicial AuthorityLabor LawUnemployment Insurance Appeal Board
References
8
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 05122 [208 AD3d 1408]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 01, 2022

Matter of Lefkow (Commissioner of Labor)

Claimant Lindsey Lefkow, a production coordinator, traveled to Costa Rica and remained there due to project delays and a COVID-19 travel ban. She filed for unemployment benefits from Costa Rica, despite being informed she could not claim benefits while out of the country, and subsequently received state and federal pandemic unemployment benefits. The Department of Labor found her ineligible due to not being available for employment in her labor market and unable to certify benefits from Costa Rica. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirmed this, also finding willful misrepresentations warranting recoverable overpayments and penalties. The Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the determination that claimant was ineligible and made willful misrepresentations.

Unemployment Insurance BenefitsEligibility for BenefitsOut of Country CertificationWillful MisrepresentationRecoverable OverpaymentsPandemic Unemployment AssistanceCOVID-19 ImpactTravel BanCertification RequirementsAvailability for Employment
References
6
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00229
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2022

Matter of Patsis (Legal Interpreting Servs., Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)

The case concerns an appeal by Legal Interpreting Services, Inc. (LIS) from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board had ruled that Louiza Patsis, a linguist working for LIS, was an employee and that LIS was liable for unemployment insurance contributions. LIS contended that Patsis was an independent contractor and challenged the Board's adherence to Department of Labor guidelines. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the finding of an employment relationship. The court noted the control LIS exercised over its linguists through a written agreement and job assignments, and found no inconsistency with the Department of Labor guidelines.

unemployment insuranceemployment relationshipindependent contractorappellate divisionlabor lawunemployment benefitsstatutory interpretationsubstantial evidenceadministrative reviewlegal interpreting
References
7
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 04249 [172 AD3d 1848]
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2019

Matter of D'Altorio (Clare Rose, Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)

This case concerns 104 striking employees of Clare Rose, Inc., including James D'Altorio, who filed for unemployment insurance benefits after their employer hired permanent replacement workers. The Department of Labor and subsequently the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board determined that these claimants were eligible for benefits and not subject to the typical seven-week suspension period under Labor Law § 592 (1). This decision was based on the employer's failure to provide written certification assuring striking employees of their return to work upon the strike's conclusion, despite hiring permanent replacements. Clare Rose, Inc. appealed these findings. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decisions, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that claimants were indeed eligible for unemployment insurance benefits.

Unemployment Insurance BenefitsStrike BenefitsIndustrial ControversyPermanent Replacement WorkersLabor Law § 592 (1)Unemployment Insurance Appeal BoardAppellate DivisionEligibility for BenefitsStriking EmployeesEmployer Certification
References
3
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 06405 [199 AD3d 1196]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2021

Matter of Paratore (Bankers Life & Cas. Co.--Commissioner of Labor)

Claimant Paul Paratore, an insurance broker and agent, filed for unemployment insurance benefits after his relationship with Bankers Life and Casualty Company (BLC) ended. The Department of Labor determined him eligible, a decision affirmed by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which found his services were not statutorily exempt and that BLC exercised sufficient control to establish an employment relationship under unemployment insurance law. BLC appealed, arguing its agreement satisfied Labor Law § 511 (21) and challenging the employment relationship finding. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decisions, agreeing that the statutory requirements were not met and that substantial evidence supported the finding of an employment relationship between BLC and the claimant.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployment StatusIndependent ContractorInsurance IndustryLabor Law ComplianceAppellate ReviewControl TestStatutory InterpretationAgent AgreementBenefits Eligibility
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

D. A. Elia Construction Corp. v. State

The petitioner, a highly experienced public work contractor, appealed a determination by the Commissioner of Labor finding willful violations of the State’s prevailing wage rate law. The Commissioner found that the petitioner underpaid 14 employees by misclassifying them as laborers when they should have been in higher-paid categories, imposing a 20% civil penalty. Petitioner argued the misclassification was an honest mistake by an inexperienced job superintendent, lacking proof of awareness by a company officer. However, the court found that the petitioner should have been aware of the violations based on daily reports submitted by the superintendent which clearly showed the misclassifications. The court affirmed the Commissioner's finding of willfulness, stating that sufficient evidence existed to conclude the petitioner at least should have known about the violations, and dismissed the petition.

prevailing wage lawemployee misclassificationwillful violationDepartment of Laborpublic works contractorcontractor liabilitysuperintendent responsibilitywage underpaymentadministrative reviewjudicial review
References
2
Case No. 193 AD3d 1190
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 08, 2021

Matter of Rodriguez (Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co.--Commissioner of Labor)

Claimant Rudy A. Rodriguez, an insurance broker, entered into an agreement with Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company, which was later terminated. Rodriguez subsequently filed for unemployment benefits. Initially, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) deemed him ineligible as an independent contractor, but the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed this decision, finding Rodriguez to be an employee and thus eligible for benefits. Penn Mutual appealed the Board's determination, challenging the finding of an employer-employee relationship and the application of Labor Law § 511 (21). The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decisions, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding of an employment relationship, citing Penn Mutual's control over Rodriguez, including sales territory assignment, price setting, provision of office space, and mandatory training and advertising approval. The court also upheld the Board's finding that its decision applied to all similarly situated individuals.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent ContractorInsurance AgentAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceControl TestLabor LawUnemployment Insurance Appeal BoardJudicial Review
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 20,896 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