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. ADJ9831208
Regular
Sep 09, 2016

MANUEL ESQUIVEL vs. MJH DESIGN BUILDERS, INC, TOWER INSURANCE CO. OF NEW YORK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior decision, finding insufficient evidence to bar Manuel Esquivel's claim by the statute of limitations. The employer had knowledge of the industrial injury claim around February 15, 2013, but failed to provide required written notice of workers' compensation rights to the applicant. The Board also noted that the employer's stipulation to providing some medical treatment could estop them from asserting the statute of limitations defense. The case is returned for further proceedings to determine the applicability of the statute of limitations.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardManuel EsquivelMJH Design BuildersTower Insurance Co.AmtrustStatute of LimitationsLabor Code section 5410Labor Code section 5405Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Order
References
14
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07049 [188 AD3d 1182]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2020

Matter of Treyvone A. (Manuel R.)

This case involves an appeal by Manuel R. from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County, which found that he neglected the subject child, Treyvone A. The order placed the child in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York. The Appellate Division, Second Department, agreed with the Family Court's finding that Manuel R. neglected the child by failing to provide adequate food and clothing. However, the Appellate Division disagreed with the Family Court's finding that Manuel R. neglected the child by using excessive corporal punishment, stating that the child's out-of-court statements lacked sufficient corroboration. Consequently, the order of disposition was modified by deleting the provision finding excessive corporal punishment, and as so modified, affirmed.

Child NeglectFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewCorporal PunishmentEvidentiary StandardsCorroboration RequirementDue ProcessEffective Assistance of CounselVacatur of OrderCPLR 5015
References
16
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00603 [135 AD3d 660]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2016

Matter of Nataysha O. (Manuel O.)

The Family Court, Bronx County, initially dismissed petitions alleging neglect against respondent Manuel O. for inflicting excessive corporal punishment on one child and derivatively neglecting two others. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously reversed this decision. The court found, based on a preponderance of evidence including the child's statements and a photograph, that respondent intentionally burned his nearly four-year-old daughter with a cigarette. The respondent's testimony of an accidental injury was rejected as improbable. Consequently, the Appellate Division entered findings of neglect and derivative neglect against the respondent and remanded the case to the Family Court for a dispositional hearing.

NeglectCorporal PunishmentChild AbuseFamily LawAppellate ProcedureEvidenceCredibilityDerivative NeglectIntentional InjuryCigarette Burn
References
5
Case No. ADJ12441930
Regular
Dec 21, 2020

MARIA ESQUIVEL vs. THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP

This case involves a worker's compensation claim for a psychiatric injury sustained by Maria Esquivel against The Permanente Medical Group. The Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration, affirming the finding that Esquivel's injury was predominantly caused by actual events of employment, not merely a stage for personal issues. Evidence included coworker harassment, a restraining order against a coworker who stalked her daughter using company resources, and threats perceived as life-threatening. The Board distinguished this case from precedent where workplace gossip was deemed incidental, finding instead a direct causal link between Esquivel's employment and her injury.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationExecutive Order N-68-20Atascadero Unified School District v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Geredes)causal connectionpsychiatric injuryneuropsychological panel qualified medical examinationDr. Kyle Van Gaasbeekco-employeesGlenda Carrera
References
5
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 03155 [149 AD3d 1040]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 26, 2017

Esquivel v. 2707 Creston Realty, LLC

The plaintiff's decedent, an elevator mechanic, sustained injuries after falling from a permanent ladder while descending from an elevator motor room in a building owned by the defendant. The plaintiff initiated an action alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1) and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court denied summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) liability for the plaintiff and dismissed the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims against the defendant. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's order, finding triable issues of fact regarding the adequacy of the ladder under Labor Law § 240(1). The appellate court also upheld the dismissal of the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, concluding the defendant neither created nor had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition.

Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 200Common-Law NegligenceElevator AccidentLadder SafetyWorkplace AccidentPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentAppellate DivisionProperty Owner Liability
References
16
Case No. ADJ8876167
Regular
Sep 18, 2015

Manuel Ruiz vs. Schwan's Home Services, Inc., Hartford Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision. The defendant argued the ALJ erred by admitting a Qualified Medical Evaluator's (QME) reports and by ordering a second QME panel in internal medicine. The Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm to warrant removal, agreeing with the ALJ that the QME substantially complied with reporting deadlines and that an internal medicine evaluation was warranted due to the applicant's alleged stroke. Therefore, removal was deemed an inappropriate and extraordinary remedy.

RemovalPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelpsychology
References
2
Case No. 532221
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2021

In the Matter of the Claim of Manuel Ortiz

Manuel Ortiz appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found he violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a. Ortiz, injured in 2009 and again in 2013, failed to disclose his prior injuries on forms and to medical examiners concerning his 2013 claim. The Board imposed mandatory and discretionary penalties, including disqualification from future indemnity benefits, which Ortiz challenged as disproportionate. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the finding of knowing material omissions was supported by substantial evidence and the penalty was not disproportionate given the repeated nature of the misrepresentations.

Workers' Compensation Law § 114-aFraudulent misrepresentationDisclosure violationIndemnity benefits disqualificationAppellate reviewSubstantial evidenceCredibility determinationPrior work-related injuryMaterial fact omissionDiscretionary penalty
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Batista v. Chater

Plaintiff Manuel Batista challenged a final determination by the Commissioner of Social Security, which denied his applications for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income due to disability. District Judge Sotomayor denied both parties' motions for judgment on the pleadings, remanding the case for reconsideration. The court found that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) failed in several respects, including not fully developing the plaintiff's psychiatric record, misinterpreting medical expert testimony regarding psychiatric impairments, and failing to obtain complete medical histories from treating physicians. The decision emphasized the ALJ's heightened duty to develop the record for pro se claimants and the improper application of Medical-Vocational Guidelines when significant nonexertional impairments exist. Consequently, the case is remanded to the Commissioner for reconsideration consistent with this Opinion and Order.

Disability BenefitsSupplemental Security Income (SSI)Social Security ActAdministrative Law JudgeJudicial ReviewRemandPsychiatric ImpairmentDepressionAnxietyMedical Record Development
References
29
Case No. ADJ3305523 (ANA 0402420)
Regular
May 05, 2011

MANUEL ALCANTAR vs. ELIZABETH SYTTERS, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a petition for reconsideration in case ADJ3305523. The petitioner, Manuel Alcantar, withdrew his petition concerning the March 28, 2011 decision. This withdrawal effectively terminates the reconsideration process for that decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedWithdrawnWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantsOrderDecisionService by Mail
References
0
Case No. ADJ4004427 (ANA 0408991)
Regular
Mar 07, 2013

MANUEL MEJIA vs. NATIONAL STEEL & SHIPBUILDING COMPANY (NASSCO)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Manuel Mejia's Petition for Reconsideration against National Steel & Shipbuilding Company (NASSCO). The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely and unverified, as detailed in the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and would have denied the petition on its merits if it had been properly filed. The WCJ will address sanctions on remand.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyUnverifiedSanctionsRemandWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeDismissedNational Steel & Shipbuilding CompanyNASSCO
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 136 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