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

Local 201, United Ass'n of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry v. Shaker, Travis & Quinn, Inc.

This case arises from a work assignment dispute between Local 38 and Local 201 regarding the fabrication of plastic inspection boxes for Shaker, Travis & Quinn, Inc. Local 201 sought a preliminary injunction to prevent Shaker from assigning work to Local 38 and to compel tripartite arbitration. Shaker moved to stay arbitration, citing a pending NLRB 10(k) proceeding, while Local 38 moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The court denied Shaker’s stay, affirming the national policy favoring arbitration. Local 201’s injunction request was denied due to insufficient proof of irreparable harm. Local 38’s motion to dismiss was also denied, with the court asserting jurisdiction under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. Ultimately, the court granted Local 201's request for tripartite arbitration, deeming it the most sensible and efficient method for resolving the three-sided dispute.

work assignment disputelabor union disputearbitration injunctionpreliminary injunctionsubject matter jurisdictionLabor Management Relations ActSection 301 LMRAtripartite arbitrationNational Labor Relations BoardNLRB 10(k) proceeding
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Road v. State

The appellate court reversed a Supreme Court order, dismissing a complaint against the Town of Colonie, which was filed by Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Road and its members. Plaintiffs had sued the County of Albany regarding land ownership and the Town of Colonie for tax refunds. The Supreme Court had denied the Town's motion to dismiss, despite a significant delay in serving the complaint. However, the appellate court found that plaintiffs failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay and did not demonstrate the merit of their claims against the Town. Additionally, the complaint was deemed deficient for non-compliance with RPAPL 1515 and General Associations Law § 12, leading to its dismissal against the Town.

Delay in serviceMotion to dismissReal property tax assessmentRPAPL article 15 actionRPTL article 7 proceedingUnincorporated associationFailure to state a claimAppellate reviewProcedural deficiencyComplaint dismissal
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 09, 1998

Riccio v. Shaker Pine, Inc.

Plaintiff was injured while working as a mason at a building in Shaker Pine Mall, falling through a stairwell opening. He sued defendants Shaker Pine, Inc., Richard Rosetti, and Rosetti Falvey Real Estate, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 240 (1), and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court granted defendants' motion for partial summary judgment, dismissing these causes of action. On appeal, the court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, finding that Labor Law § 240 (1) did not apply to permanent stairways or require barricades, and that Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims failed due to the defendants' lack of specific control over the work site.

Construction accidentFall from heightStairwell openingSummary judgmentLabor Law Section 240(1)Labor Law Section 200Common-law negligenceOwner liabilityContractor liabilityWorkplace safety
References
16
Case No. ADJ4228232 (SFO 0497809) ADJ3132960 (SFO 0497808)
Regular
May 17, 2010

MAGDA RODRIGUEZ vs. ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, TOWNSHIP BUILDING SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's awards in two cases concerning applicant Magda Rodriguez. The Board found that the WCJ erred by issuing a combined permanent disability rating without sufficient medical evidence supporting apportionment between the two distinct industrial injuries. Additionally, the Board disagreed with the denial of credit for overpayment of temporary disability indemnity, stating equitable considerations did not favor the applicant. The cases are returned to the trial level for further development of the medical record regarding apportionment and a new decision on temporary disability credit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindingsAwardsOrdersApplicantDefendantIndustrial InjurySpineUpper Extremities
References
5
Case No. ADJ7568369
Regular
Nov 28, 2011

MAGDA DELGADO vs. NORRIS INVESTMENTS, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's (WCJ) findings. The WCJ correctly determined that the applicant's low back injury did not cause permanent disability or require future medical treatment, finding the report of the panel Qualified Medical Examiner (QME), Dr. Baldwin, to be substantial evidence. The WCJ also found Dr. Moelleken's report unreliable as it was not based on a physical examination by the physician. The Board specifically declined to incorporate the WCJ's commentary questioning Dr. Moelleken's status as the primary treating physician.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPrimary Treating PhysicianQualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidencePermanent and Stationary ReportDue ProcessFuture Medical TreatmentObjective FindingsSubjective Complaints
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Salerno v. North Colonie Central School District

Ralph Salerno, an employee, suffered a slip and fall injury on a mixture of water and grease in a walk-in cooler at Shaker High School, part of the North Colonie Central School District. He and his wife, derivatively, filed a personal injury lawsuit. The defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted by the Supreme Court, leading to the plaintiffs' appeal. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the defendants either caused the hazardous condition or had sufficient notice of it. Consequently, the plaintiffs did not meet their burden of proof.

personal injuryslip and fallsummary judgmentnegligencepremises liabilityconstructive noticeactual noticeburden of proofappellate reviewschool district
References
8
Showing 1-6 of 6 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