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

S & L BIRCHWOOD, LLC v. LFC Capital, Inc.

Plaintiffs, S & L Birchwood, LLC and S & L Birchwood Realty, LLC, filed a breach of contract action against LFC Capital, Inc., following a dispute over a medical equipment lease. LFC alleged default, and S&L initiated a declaratory judgment action in New York state court, which was subsequently removed to federal court. LFC moved to dismiss the complaint or, alternatively, to transfer the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, citing a forum-selection clause in their agreement. The court analyzed the enforceability of the clause, determining it to be mandatory due to language of 'irrevocable submission' to Illinois jurisdiction, despite not explicitly using 'must' or 'may'. Consequently, the court denied LFC's motion to dismiss but granted the request for transfer, concluding that venue was improper in the Eastern District of New York and that transfer to the Northern District of Illinois was warranted under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a) or 1406(a).

Forum selection clauseBreach of contractDiversity jurisdictionTransfer of venueDismissal motionIllinois contract lawNew York jurisdictionMedical equipment leasingMandatory clause interpretationFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3)
References
14
Case No. 2014 NY Slip Op 06183 [120 AD3d 1315]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 2014

McDonald v. Winter Bros. Transfer Station Corp.

The plaintiff, Andrew McDonald, appealed from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, which granted the defendant Winter Bros. Transfer Station Corp.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in an action to recover damages for personal injuries. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the order, holding that the defendant established a prima facie defense under the Workers' Compensation Law. The court found that the defendant and the plaintiff's employer, Winter Bros. Waste Systems, Inc., operate as a single integrated entity, thereby extending workers' compensation protection to the defendant as an alter ego of the employer. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to this defense, leading to the proper dismissal of the complaint.

Alter Ego DoctrineWorkers' Compensation DefenseSummary JudgmentPersonal InjuryEmployer LiabilityIntegrated EntityAppellate DivisionSuffolk CountyTriable Issue of FactRespondent
References
8
Case No. Adv. Proc. No. 16-01074 (SMB)
Regular Panel Decision

Core Litigation Trust ex rel. Kravitz v. Apollo Global Management, LLC (In re AOG Entertainment, Inc.)

The CORE Litigation Trust, as assignee of Debtors’ pre-petition secured lenders, initiated a proceeding in California State Court against a group of defendants. The Trust alleged inducing a breach of contract and intentional interference with contracts. The action was removed to federal court and subsequently transferred to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The Trust moved for mandatory abstention and remand to the California State Court. The Court granted the motion, finding it had non-core, 'related to' jurisdiction and that the action could be timely adjudicated in the state court.

Mandatory abstentionRemandBankruptcy jurisdictionNon-core jurisdictionRelated to jurisdictionTimely adjudicationState law claimsFederalismComityChoice of law
References
75
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Settlement Capital Corp.

Settlement Capital Corporation (SCC) sought court approval, under New York's Structured Settlement Protection Act (SSPA), to acquire $125,000 of a $225,000 annuity payment due to Richard C. Ballos on October 1, 2010. Ballos, a totally disabled father of two, agreed to transfer these rights for a net advance of $36,500, reflecting a 15.591% annual discount rate. The court, presided over by Justice Patricia E. Satterfield, denied the petition after a hearing on April 23, 2003. The decision hinged on a two-pronged test: whether the transfer was in Ballos's 'best interest' and if the transaction terms were 'fair and reasonable.' The court found that Ballos did not demonstrate 'true hardship' given his other income sources and previous transfer of structured settlement payments, concluding it was not in his or his dependents' best interest. Furthermore, the court deemed the 15.591% discount rate, resulting in Ballos receiving only 29% of the transferred amount, unconscionable and not 'fair and reasonable.'

Structured SettlementStructured Settlement Protection Act (SSPA)Annuity TransferDiscount RateBest Interest StandardFair and Reasonable StandardPayee ProtectionFinancial HardshipCourt ApprovalGeneral Obligations Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lauritano v. Consolidated Edison Co.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding the transfer of liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. The claimant suffered a work-related heart attack in 1992, received benefits, and the case was closed in 1997. After another heart attack and surgery in 1999, the claim was reopened in 2001. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found it was not a stale claim, but the Board reversed, transferring liability to the Special Fund. The Special Fund argued that employer payments for lost time in 1999-2000 constituted advance payments of compensation, precluding transfer. However, the court affirmed the Board's determination that these payments, made pursuant to a general sick leave plan, did not qualify as advance payments of compensation under § 25-a, thus supporting the transfer of liability to the Special Fund.

Special Fund for Reopened CasesWorkers' Compensation Law Section 25-aStale Claim DoctrineAdvance Payments of CompensationSick Leave BenefitsLiability TransferHeart Attack InjuryReopened CaseAppellate Review of Board DecisionSubstantial Evidence Standard
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 26, 2013

Claim of Khomitch v. Crotched Mountain Community

Claimant was injured in 2004 and received compensation through February 2007. In 2011, she sought reimbursement for medical bills and lost wages, leading to a stipulation where the carrier paid $4,750 for medical and transportation expenses (M&T). The carrier then sought to transfer liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a. The Special Fund argued the M&T payment was disguised compensation to improperly trigger the liability transfer. The Board Panel, after remittal, concluded that the Special Fund has standing to litigate if the payment was an advance payment of compensation. The Board rescinded the liability transfer to the Special Fund, without prejudice, pending further evidence. The employer and carrier appealed this decision, which was ultimately affirmed.

Workers' Compensation BoardSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesTransfer of LiabilityWorkers' Compensation Law § 25-aMedical and Transportation ExpensesAdvance Payment of CompensationStanding to LitigateClosed Case ReopeningIndemnity BenefitsBoard Panel Decision
References
7
Case No. 12-12900-scc
Regular Panel Decision

In re Patriot Coal Corp.

This memorandum decision addresses motions to transfer the Chapter 11 cases of Patriot Coal Corporation and its ninety-eight affiliated debtors from the Southern District of New York. The Debtors established venue in New York by forming two New York entities solely for that purpose shortly before their filing. While acknowledging no bad faith, the Court found that this "literal compliance" violated the spirit and purpose of the venue statute. The motions to transfer were granted, but not to the Southern District of West Virginia as sought by several movants. Instead, the Court ordered the transfer of the cases to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, citing the location of Patriot's corporate headquarters, records, management, and its accessibility for a broader range of stakeholders including retirees in the Illinois Basin.

BankruptcyChapter 11Venue TransferCorporate RestructuringCoal Mining IndustryAffiliate Venue RuleSubstance Over Form DoctrineJudicial EconomyCreditor InterestsLabor Union
References
27
Case No. 99-11240 B, 08-CV-774A, Adv. No. 01-1193B
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 01, 2010

McHale v. Boulder Capital LLC (In Re 1031 Tax Group, LLC)

This memorandum opinion addresses the calculation of prejudgment interest on fraudulent transfer claims recovered by Gerard A. McHale, Jr., P.A., as Trustee for the 1031 Debtors Liquidation Trust, against the Boulder Defendants. The Court determined that three transfers in 2005 and 2006 were fraudulent under section 548(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. It concludes that the Trustee is entitled to prejudgment interest from the adversary proceeding commencement date, March 20, 2009, at the bank prime loan rates in effect on the dates of each transfer (6.5%, 8.0%, and 8.25%). Additionally, the Trustee is entitled to post-judgment interest at the federal judgment rate, and a final judgment is to be entered pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).

Prejudgment InterestFraudulent TransferBankruptcy CodeAdversary ProceedingFederal Judgment RateMarket Rate InterestPrime RateRule 54(b) JudgmentTrustee RecoveryBankruptcy Court
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re the Complaint of American President Lines, Ltd.

This case involves two related limitation proceedings (the "APL Action" and the "Hanjin Action") arising from a vessel collision in Korean waters between the President Washington (owned by American President Lines, Ltd. - APL) and the Hanjin Hong Kong (chartered by Hanjin Shipping Company Ltd. and owned by Highlight Navigation Corporation). The U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, presided by Judge SWEET, addressed motions concerning forum non conveniens, transfer of venue, and choice of law. The Court granted APL's motions for summary judgment, dismissing Hanjin's affirmative defenses regarding forum non conveniens and venue transfer in the APL Action, and striking (with leave to replead) Hanjin's defense concerning Korean law. Concurrently, the Court denied Hanjin's motion to dismiss the Hanjin Action on forum non conveniens grounds, concluding that the balance of private and public interest factors did not strongly favor dismissal to a foreign forum or transfer to the Western District of Washington.

Admiralty LawMaritime LawVessel CollisionLimitation of LiabilityForum Non ConveniensTransfer of VenueChoice of LawCargo ClaimsInternational ShippingKorean Law
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Pavilion Place Associates

The case concerns a motion to transfer the Chapter 11 bankruptcy venue of Pavilion Place Associates, a Connecticut limited partnership, from the Southern District of New York to the District of Minnesota. The debtor's sole asset is a shopping center in Roseville, Minnesota. While the debtor's principal place of business, managerial decisions, and financial planning are in New York, the motion was brought by the Trustees of the Central Pension Fund, who are secured creditors. The court, presided over by Bankruptcy Judge Tina L. Brozman, acknowledged that venue was proper in New York. However, considering factors like the location of the assets, the proximity of the majority of creditors to Minnesota, and the need for economic and efficient administration of the estate, the court granted the motion to transfer the case to the District of Minnesota. The decision emphasized that improved real estate cases are often better administered in the district where the property is located.

Venue TransferBankruptcy Chapter 11Principal Place of BusinessInterest of JusticeConvenience of PartiesSingle Asset Real EstateShopping CenterSecured DebtUnsecured CreditorsJudicial Discretion
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 1,225 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