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

In re the Arbitration between Union-Endicott Central School District & Union-Endicott Maintenance Workers' Ass'n ex rel. Kolmel

Petitioner Peters appealed a Supreme Court order denying a stay of arbitration between Peters and the Union-Endicott Maintenance Workers’ Association, and George Kolmel. Kolmel, a maintenance worker, had resigned but was subsequently terminated after allegations of a sex offense. The Union filed a grievance asserting a violation of the collective bargaining agreement regarding retirement health benefits, arguing Kolmel met the eligibility requirements despite his termination. The Supreme Court compelled arbitration, a decision affirmed by the appellate court. The court ruled that arbitration of postemployment health benefits is permissible, not against public policy, and falls within the broad arbitration clause of the CBA, regardless of the employee's termination for misconduct.

Arbitration DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementRetirement Health BenefitsEmployee DismissalMisconduct AllegationsPublic Policy ProhibitionArbitrabilityPostemployment BenefitsAppellate AffirmationLabor Law
References
14
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 00612 [191 AD3d 1088]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 2021

Matter of Clancy v. Park Line Asphalt Maintenance

Celia Clancy, an office manager, filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits, asserting that her repetitive work activities for Park Line Asphalt Maintenance aggravated her pre-existing bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and herniated cervical discs, causing a disability. Although she had a history of these conditions and had received prior Social Security disability benefits and undergone multiple surgeries, she had returned to full duty work. The Workers' Compensation Board disallowed her claim, concluding that her conditions were not dormant and nondisabling prior to her employment with Park Line, thus precluding an occupational disease claim based on exacerbation. However, the Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Board's decision, finding no evidence that her pre-existing conditions were disabling in a compensation sense before the alleged disablement date. The matter was remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with the Appellate Division's determination.

Occupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeHerniated Cervical DiscsPre-existing ConditionAggravation of ConditionDormant and Nondisabling ConditionWorkers' Compensation BenefitsAppellate ReviewRemandOffice Manager
References
10
Case No. 532221
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2021

Matter of Ortiz v. Maintenance

Manuel Ortiz appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board, which affirmed a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's finding that he violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a. The violation stemmed from Ortiz's failure to disclose a prior 2009 work-related injury on his C-3 form and to medical consultants and treating physicians while seeking benefits for a 2013 injury. The Board imposed mandatory and discretionary penalties, including permanent disqualification from future indemnity benefits, citing the 'egregious' and repeated nature of the misrepresentations. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the finding of a violation was supported by substantial evidence and that the imposed penalty was not disproportionate to the offense.

Workers' Compensation FraudMisrepresentation of InjuryIndemnity BenefitsWorkers' Compensation LawAppellate DivisionPrior Injury DisclosureCredibility AssessmentPermanent DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Board AppealMaterial Omission
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pagan v. International Ladies Garment Workers Union

Plaintiff Matilda Pagan brought a personal injury action after slipping and falling on a hallway floor at premises leased by Local 23-25 International Ladies Garment Workers Union from 1710 Broadway Inc. Supreme Building Maintenance Corp. was the maintenance contractor responsible for the building. Plaintiff alleged that Supreme Building negligently swept the floor with an unknown chemical, creating a slippery condition on newly installed tiles. The Supreme Court initially denied Supreme Building's motion for summary judgment. However, this appellate court reversed the lower court's order, finding the plaintiff's allegations conclusory, self-serving, and highly speculative, without sufficient proof of negligence. Consequently, summary judgment was granted in favor of Supreme Building Maintenance Corp., and the complaint against it was dismissed. Additionally, an appeal from a separate judgment, which granted summary judgment to Local 23-25 and 1710 Broadway Inc., was dismissed because Supreme Building was not 'aggrieved' by that judgment.

Personal InjurySlip and FallSummary JudgmentMaintenance NegligencePremises LiabilityAppellate ProcedureDismissal of ComplaintLack of EvidenceSpeculative AllegationsThird-Party Action
References
5
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 03300 [205 AD3d 1257]
Regular Panel Decision
May 19, 2022

Matter of White v. SEG Maintenance, Inc.

Jermaine White, an asbestos handler, filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits alleging injuries sustained on the job. The Workers' Compensation Board reversed a prior decision, ruling that White failed to provide timely notice of his injury to the employer as required by Workers' Compensation Law § 18. The Board, acting as the sole arbiter of witness credibility, found the employer's representatives' testimony more credible regarding the alleged accident and notice thereof. It further concluded that White failed to demonstrate a lack of prejudice to the employer due to the delayed notice. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, upholding its discretionary power in assessing witness credibility and excusing failures to provide timely notice.

Workers' CompensationTimely NoticeEmployer KnowledgeCredibility AssessmentAppellate ReviewInjury ClaimAsbestos HandlerDebris AccidentShoulder InjuryElbow Injury
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Homan v. Gotham Building Maintenance Corp.

The claimant, a fireman for Gotham Building Maintenance Corporation, suffered an inguinal hernia in 1977 but did not file a workers' compensation claim until 1982 when surgery became necessary. The State Insurance Fund, the carrier, paid for the surgery in September 1983. At a hearing, the employer and carrier argued the claim was time-barred under Workers' Compensation Law § 28, as it was filed more than two years after the accident. However, the Workers' Compensation Board ruled that the carrier's payment for the surgery constituted an advance payment of compensation, thereby waiving the two-year limitation period. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing established precedent that such advance payments, even if made after the statutory period, waive the limitation, especially when timeliness was not disputed before payment.

Workers' CompensationLimitation PeriodAdvance PaymentWaiverMedical ExpensesHernia InjuryTimeliness of ClaimBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewState Insurance Fund
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Curran v. International Union, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers

Plaintiff, an employee of Carborundum Company, suffered a partial hand amputation in a "rubber roll" machine accident on March 8, 1979. He sued his unions, International Union, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers, AFL-CIO, and Abrasive Workers, Local 8-12058, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, alleging state law negligence for failing to safeguard him from dangers and a federal claim for breaching their duty of fair representation. The unions moved for summary judgment, arguing federal law preempts the negligence claim and they did not breach their duty of fair representation. The court granted the unions' motion regarding the negligence claim, ruling that a union's duty to its members, arising from a collective bargaining agreement, is governed exclusively by federal law and does not include a duty of care. However, the court denied the motion regarding the breach of fair representation claim, finding sufficient facts and allegations to infer that the unions may have discharged their duty in an arbitrary, perfunctory manner or in bad faith, thus leaving triable issues of fact.

Union LiabilityDuty of Fair RepresentationNegligence ClaimFederal PreemptionCollective Bargaining AgreementSummary Judgment MotionLabor LawWorkplace AccidentSafety and Health CommitteeArbitrary Union Action
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brooks v. Maintenance Service Resources, Inc.

The plaintiff was injured on March 3, 1995, after stepping into an opening in a raised floor at her office. The opening was made by Universal Builders & Developers Corp. workers at the request of Allied Exterminating workers, who were performing pest control services. Allied was hired by Maintenance Service Resources, Inc., which had a contract with HIP of Greater New York (plaintiff's employer) for maintenance and pest control. The plaintiff sued Maintenance, and Maintenance then filed a third-party complaint against Allied for contribution or indemnification. A jury found both Allied and Maintenance negligent, assigning 40% fault to Allied and 60% to Maintenance. The Supreme Court, Kings County, issued an interlocutory judgment based on this verdict. On appeal, the court found no rational basis for the jury's conclusion that Maintenance was negligent, as Maintenance did not own or occupy the office, nor did it have a comprehensive maintenance obligation or control over the work. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the interlocutory judgment and dismissed both the plaintiff's complaint against Maintenance and Maintenance's third-party complaint against Allied.

Personal InjuryNegligencePremises LiabilityThird-Party ActionAppellate ReviewDismissal of ComplaintContribution and IndemnificationJury VerdictFault ApportionmentContractual Obligation
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 07, 2000

In re Economy Office Maintenance, Inc.

This is an appeal from a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which assessed Economy Office Maintenance Inc. (EOM) for additional unemployment insurance contributions. EOM, a cleaning services provider, challenged the Board’s ruling that all its workers are employees. The court's review is limited to whether the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. Despite EOM’s subcontractor agreements labeling workers as independent contractors, the control reserved by EOM was deemed sufficient to establish an employer-employee relationship. The court found no basis to disturb the Board's decision, affirming it.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployer-Employee RelationshipIndependent ContractorSubstantial EvidenceCredibility of WitnessesAppellate ReviewAdministrative Law Judge BiasRemittal for New HearingCleaning ServicesNew York
References
11
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 02239 [226 AD3d 1282]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2024

Matter of Medina v. American Maintenance Inc.

The claimant, Delmi Medina, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied her claim for workers' compensation benefits, ruling that she did not give timely notice of injury. She also appealed the Board's denial of her application for reconsideration and/or full Board review. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decisions. The Court found that the claimant had abandoned her challenge to the underlying November 2022 Board decision by only presenting substantive arguments related to the March 2023 decision denying reconsideration. The Court further held that the Board did not abuse its discretion or act arbitrarily by denying reconsideration, nor was there a violation of due process when the same panel members reviewed the reconsideration application.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsTimely Notice of InjuryAdministrative ReviewBoard Panel DecisionReconsideration DenialFull Board ReviewDue ProcessAbuse of DiscretionArbitrary and CapriciousAppellate Review
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 22,822 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