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

Clemente v. Blumenberg

In this case, plaintiff Deborah Clemente, injured in a rear-end collision, alleged a herniated disk, supported by her treating neurologist and MRI. Defendant Ernest J. Blumenberg sought to introduce a biomedical engineer, M. Kenneth Salzer, as an expert to argue the low-impact collision could not cause such injuries. The court conducted a Frye hearing to assess the engineer's methodology, which relied on repair costs and photographs to calculate vehicle velocity change. Finding this methodology unscientific, untested, and not generally accepted, the court precluded Salzer's testimony. The judge emphasized the gatekeeping role to exclude unreliable scientific and technical evidence under both Frye and Daubert/Kumho standards, noting the engineer lacked medical qualifications for injury causation opinions.

Expert TestimonyBiomedical EngineeringBiomechanicsFrye HearingDaubert StandardKumho Tire StandardAdmissibility of EvidenceScientific EvidenceLow-Impact CollisionPersonal Injury
References
10
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00265 [168 AD3d 823]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 16, 2019

Loretta v. Split Dev. Corp.

Vincent Loretta, a plumber, suffered personal injuries after falling from a ladder while installing pipes at a construction site owned by Split Development Corp. He and his wife sued for damages, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court denied their motion for summary judgment on liability due to triable issues of fact, and a jury subsequently found the ladder adequate. The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment, concluding that there was a valid line of reasoning for the jury's verdict and that the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentLabor Law 240(1)Summary JudgmentJury VerdictAppellate ReviewProximate CauseSafety DeviceConstruction AccidentPlumbing Work
References
15
Case No. 15-36090
Regular Panel Decision

In re Covelli

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court granted the Debtors' motion to reopen their Chapter 7 bankruptcy case and imposed sanctions on creditor William Clement for violating the discharge injunction. Clement had pursued a deficiency judgment in state court on a discharged mortgage debt, despite previous court orders. The Court found Clement in contempt and ordered him to withdraw the state court proceeding, imposing a daily penalty for non-compliance. The Court denied Clement's separate motion to declare an earlier Chapter 13 petition date as the effective date for the Chapter 7 discharge, reaffirming the June 15, 2015 Chapter 7 petition date.

BankruptcyDischarge InjunctionSanctionsMotion to ReopenPetition DateDeficiency JudgmentContemptChapter 7Chapter 13Automatic Stay
References
82
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Clements v. Panzarella

The petitioners, Warren Clements and Raymond Rice, both police officers, initiated a proceeding to annul two determinations by the Incorporated Village of Malverne that denied them benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c for injuries sustained on duty. The Supreme Court dismissed their petition, and the Appellate Division affirmed this dismissal. The court clarified that General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits are intended for a narrow category of injuries, specifically those incurred during special work involving heightened risks inherent to police duties in the criminal justice process, a standard distinct and more stringent than that for Workers' Compensation benefits. Clements injured his back removing police tape after a flood, and Rice injured his elbow slipping at the police station. The court found that neither injury met the 'heightened risk' criteria required for General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits.

General Municipal Law § 207-cPolice Officer BenefitsOn-Duty InjuryHeightened RiskCriminal Justice ProcessWorkers' Compensation DistinctionStatutory InterpretationAppellate AffirmationPetition DismissalMunicipal Liability
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Clemente v. New York State Division of Parole

Plaintiff Clemente, a Hispanic female parole officer and union leader, sued the New York State Division of Parole for employment discrimination under Title VII. She alleged race and gender discrimination, retaliation for a prior lawsuit, and a hostile work environment, citing incidents like a special assignment, a derogatory letter targeting union leaders, a unit transfer, and demeaning comments from a human resources director. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing a lack of evidence for discriminatory motive. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, finding that Clemente failed to demonstrate that the Division's actions were motivated by her race, gender, or previous protected activity, instead concluding that the actions stemmed from her position as a union leader, which is not a protected characteristic under Title VII.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VIISummary JudgmentRace DiscriminationGender DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentUnion LeadershipPrima Facie CaseCausation
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 1997

Cronin v. Perry

The plaintiff, an electrician employed by Photocircuits Corporation, sustained a chemical burn on the job and was treated by Loretta Schindelman, a company nurse, who referred him to Herbert Perry, M.D. The plaintiff alleged malpractice against Schindelman and negligence against Photocircuits for failing to provide competent medical care, despite having filed for and collected workers' compensation benefits. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, granted separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, which was subsequently affirmed on appeal. The court held that workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy for an employee injured by a co-worker or employer in the course of employment, especially when medical services are provided as a consequence of employment. Furthermore, the plaintiff's acceptance of the Workers' Compensation Board award rendered the claims res judicata.

medical malpracticenegligenceworkers' compensationexclusive remedysummary judgmentres judicatachemical burnemployee injurynurse liabilityphysician malpractice
References
10
Case No. ADJ1031497
Regular
Jan 28, 2018

LORETTA MACFARLAND vs. THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted Loretta MacFarland's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. This grant is based on an initial review of the record and the need for further study of factual and legal issues. The WCAB determined reconsideration is necessary to achieve a complete understanding and render a just decision. Consequently, all future communications must be filed in writing directly with the WCAB Commissioners' office, not local district offices or electronically.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanente Medical GroupAthens Administratorsstatutory time constraintsfactual and legal issuesjust and reasoned decisionfurther proceedingsOffice of the CommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management System
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2016

Bruzzese v. Lynch

This case involves Adam Bruzzese, a former Special Agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), who sued Attorney General Loretta Lynch for alleged discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Bruzzese claimed his reassignment from Special Agent to Technical Surveillance Specialist was due to a perceived mental health condition. A Fitness-for-Duty evaluation concluded he had personality characteristics that increased safety risks, leading to the restriction of his arming authority and permanent reassignment. The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, determining that Bruzzese was not a 'qualified individual' or an 'individual with a disability' under the Act. The decision highlighted that his personality traits, not a protected mental disability, rendered him unsuitable for his law enforcement role.

Rehabilitation ActDisability DiscriminationSpecial AgentFirearms AuthorityFitness-for-Duty EvaluationPersonality CharacteristicsPerceived DisabilitySummary JudgmentLaw EnforcementEmployment Reassignment
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 1990

Clemente Global Growth Fund, Inc. v. Pickens

The case involves Clemente Global Growth Fund, Inc. (the "Fund") which previously obtained a preliminary injunction against defendants including T. Boone Pickens, III, Sumter Partners, L.P., and Grace Global Acquisition Partners, regarding violations of the 1940 Investment Company Act during a tender offer. Sumter announced withdrawal from the tender offer and intent to sell shares, leading defendants to move for summary judgment or vacatur of the injunction, arguing mootness or that Grace Global is not an investment company. The Fund cross-moved for divestiture of excess shares. The Court denied all motions, finding genuine factual issues regarding Sumter's true independence from Grace Global and whether Grace Global constitutes an investment company. The remedy of divestiture was deemed premature, and further discovery was ordered.

Investment Company Act of 1940Tender OfferPreliminary InjunctionSummary Judgment MotionVacaturMootnessSecurities LawInvestment Company DefinitionGeneral Partnership InterestHowey Test
References
17
Case No. ADJ6821265
Regular
Oct 07, 2013

LORETTA LOPEZ vs. ROBERT DAVIES, D.D.S, ZENITH INSURANCE

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant, Loretta Lopez. The WCAB adopted the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) as stated in their report. Consequently, the applicant's petition for reconsideration was officially denied.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeniedAdministrative Law JudgeWCJRecord reviewIncorporated reportSan Bernardino District OfficeZenith InsuranceLoretta Lopez
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 45 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