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. 2016 NY Slip Op 00957 [136 AD3d 783]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2016

Sanchez v. Metro Builders Corp.

Juan P. Sanchez initiated a personal injury lawsuit after falling three stories from a roof during snow removal, alleging violations of Labor Law sections 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6) against general contractor Metro Builders Corp. and subcontractor JMZ Builders, Inc. Metro, in turn, sought indemnification from JMZ and Sanchez's employers, Cocos Brothers. The Appellate Division ultimately granted Sanchez's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability against Metro, finding Metro to be a statutory agent of the owner. Concurrently, Metro's cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence was granted, while its claims under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) were denied on the merits. Metro's indemnification claims against JMZ and Cocos Brothers were dismissed as untimely.

Workplace FallConstruction AccidentLabor Law ViolationsSummary Judgment GrantedGeneral ContractorStatutory AgentIndemnification ClaimsAppellate ReviewPersonal InjurySafety Devices
References
20
Case No. CA 15-00615
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 2016

ALATI, ANTHONY JOSEPH v. DIVIN BUILDERS, INC.

Plaintiff Anthony Joseph Alati sued Divin Builders, Inc. and Michael Friery for injuries sustained from a ladder fall during construction. The causes of action included common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6). The Supreme Court granted plaintiff partial summary judgment and denied Divin Builders' cross-motion. The Appellate Division modified the order, granting parts of Divin Builders' cross-motion to dismiss plaintiff’s common-law negligence and Labor Law §§ 200 and 241(6) causes of action, except for specific NYCRR violations under 241(6), and affirmed the remaining parts of the order.

Ladder AccidentLabor LawCommon-Law NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewConstruction AccidentWorkplace SafetyIndependent ContractorSupervisory ControlStatutory Violation
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 20, 2015

Alati v. Divin Builders, Inc.

Plaintiff, an independent contractor, sustained injuries after falling from a ladder while installing a light fixture in a residence built by defendant Divin Builders, Inc. Plaintiff initiated a common-law negligence and Labor Law action, alleging violations of sections 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court granted plaintiff partial summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability and denied the defendant's cross-motion for dismissal. On appeal, the higher court modified the order, granting Divin Builders, Inc.'s cross-motion to dismiss the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims. Additionally, the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim was dismissed, except for those parts based on alleged violations of 12 NYCRR 23-1.21 (b) (1) and (3) (iv). The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision to grant plaintiff partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action.

Ladder FallConstruction AccidentLabor LawSummary JudgmentNegligenceWorkplace SafetyIndependent ContractorAppellate ReviewStatutory ViolationPersonal Injury
References
9
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 03894
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 24, 2024

Olivera-Perez v. B.A.M. Bldrs., Inc.

Macario Olivera-Perez sustained personal injuries during construction work. The Workers' Compensation Board determined Builders Joseph and Sons, LLC, was his employer and awarded benefits. Olivera-Perez then filed a personal injury action against Builders Joseph and Sons, LLC, and others. Builders Joseph and Sons, LLC, cross-moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing the Workers' Compensation Law provides an exclusive remedy. The Supreme Court denied this, but the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed, granting the dismissal of the complaint against Builders Joseph and Sons, LLC, based on the Workers' Compensation Board's prior finding and the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law. The court also converted cross-claims against Builders Joseph and Sons, LLC, into third-party causes of action.

Personal InjuryWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityEmployer-Employee RelationshipMotion to DismissAppellate ReviewConstruction AccidentSupreme Court Order ModifiedCross-Claims ConversionJudicial DiscretionDocumentary Evidence
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Martegani v. Cirrus Design Corp.

Micaela Martegani, individually and as natural guardian of her minor child, commenced a wrongful death action against Cirrus Design Corporation and East End Aviation following her husband's death in a 2006 plane crash. The parties reached a settlement, and Martegani sought court approval, including attorney's fees and the establishment of a trust for the minor child's share. The court approved the settlement in principle, but significantly reduced the requested attorney's fees by 30% due to the absence of contemporaneous time records. Additionally, the court denied the recovery of "case expenses" and a $5,000 reserve due to insufficient documentation. The final order authorized Martegani to settle the claims, with specific allocations for attorney's fees, the minor child's trust, and Martegani's personal compensation.

Infant SettlementWrongful DeathPlane CrashAttorney FeesContingency FeeCourt ApprovalMinor Child TrustSettlement AllocationCase ExpensesDocumentation Requirements
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 15, 2012

Rozenfeld v. Department of Design & Construction

Plaintiff Paul Rozenfeld sued his former employer, the New York City Department of Design and Construction (DDC), and several DDC employees, alleging discrimination and retaliation based on race, color, and age under federal and state laws, including Title VII, ADEA, § 1983, SHRL, and CHRL. Defendants moved for summary judgment, and Plaintiff cross-moved. The court found that Plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily waived most of his claims through a settlement agreement. Even if the waiver were invalid, Plaintiff failed to demonstrate adverse employment action or circumstances inferring discrimination. The court denied Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted Defendants' motion, dismissing all of Plaintiff's claims.

Employment DiscriminationAge DiscriminationRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary JudgmentWaiver AgreementADEATitle VIISection 1983
References
70
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Joyner v. Event Design Associates, Inc.

Claimant was retained by Event Design Associates, Inc. (EDA) to transport furniture and event props for a party. While en route to a hotel during this assignment, claimant was involved in an automobile accident and sustained serious injuries. Subsequently, claimant applied for workers' compensation benefits, asserting an employer-employee relationship with EDA. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled in favor of the claimant, finding that an employment relationship existed. EDA appealed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's ruling, concluding there was substantial evidence to support the finding of an employer-employee relationship, based on factors such as EDA's control over the work, method of payment, and right to terminate.

Workers' CompensationEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent ContractorSubstantial EvidenceControl TestAppellate ReviewAutomobile AccidentNew YorkWorkers' Compensation BoardTemporary Employment
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nichols v. BDS Landscape Design

Deborah Nichols, injured in a slip and fall in 2005, sought to enforce an oral settlement for a negligence claim against BDS Landscape Design, William Dobson, III, and National Grange Mutual Insurance. Despite reaching an agreement contingent on a workers' compensation lien waiver, National Grange later disputed the settlement and claimed the action was time-barred after Nichols received the necessary consent. Nichols initiated a special proceeding to compel payment, which the Supreme Court granted. On appeal, the higher court reversed the lower court's order, converting the special proceeding into an action, and held that Nichols failed to establish the existence and terms of the settlement agreement as a matter of law.

Personal InjurySlip and FallNegligenceSettlement AgreementBreach of ContractStatute of LimitationsSpecial ProceedingConversion of ActionWorkers' Compensation LienInsurance Dispute
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. General Design and Development, Inc.

Jerry Johnson was severely injured in November 1991 when a drill bound, causing him to fall from a stepladder at a construction site. He and his spouse sued the general contractor, General Design and Development, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), among other claims. General subsequently initiated a third-party action against subcontractors Omni Plumbing Company and Thomas P. Pleat Construction, Inc., seeking contribution and indemnification. Plaintiffs were granted partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) by the Supreme Court. The defendants appealed, contending the injuries were not elevation-related. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's order, ruling that the stepladder was inadequate and the accident constituted an elevation-related risk under Labor Law § 240 (1), thus establishing a prima facie violation.

Construction AccidentLabor LawFall from HeightScaffolding LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewPersonal InjuryContractor LiabilitySubcontractor LiabilityIndemnification
References
11
Case No. CA 15-01122
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 25, 2016

KING, III, JOSEPH v. MALONE HOME BUILDERS, INC.

Plaintiff Joseph King III commenced this Labor Law action against Malone Home Builders, Inc., seeking damages for injuries from a fall through an unguarded stairwell during construction. King moved for partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) and to dismiss the defendant's special employee defense, which claimed workers' compensation as the sole remedy. The Supreme Court conditionally granted King's motion for liability but denied the dismissal of the special employee defense, citing a factual dispute. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, modified the Supreme Court's order. The Appellate Division granted King's motion in its entirety, dismissing the defendant's special employee defense based on collateral estoppel from a prior Workers' Compensation Board determination, and affirmed the partial summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability for the plaintiff.

Labor LawWorkers' CompensationCollateral EstoppelSpecial Employee DoctrineSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewConstruction AccidentUnguarded StairwellPersonal InjuryEmployer Liability
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 672 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