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. 2021 NY Slip Op 04288
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 09, 2021

Taylor v. Piatkowski Riteway Meats, Inc.

Plaintiff Michael A. Taylor, an employee of Durham Staffing, Inc., was assigned to work at Piatkowski Riteway Meats, Inc. and was injured there. He commenced an action against Piatkowski Riteway Meats, Inc., which moved for summary judgment, asserting that Taylor was a special employee and his claim was barred by Workers' Compensation Law. The Supreme Court granted the defendant's motion. However, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed the order, finding that the defendant failed to meet its burden of establishing as a matter of law that it exercised complete control over the plaintiff's work, thus raising a triable issue of fact regarding the special employee doctrine. Consequently, the motion for summary judgment was denied, and the complaint reinstated.

Special Employee DoctrineWorkers' CompensationSummary Judgment ReversalAppellate DivisionEmployer ControlStaffing Agency LiabilityWorkplace InjuryTriable Issue of FactComplaint ReinstatementLabor Law Litigation
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Garafolo v. Arms Hills Supermarkets

This is an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision from September 21, 1978, disallowing a compensation claim. The claimant, a meat wrapper, developed asthma exacerbated by polyvinyl chloride fumes at work. She filed a claim in May 1975, stating disablement from "meat wrapper’s asthma" as of July 28, 1975, when she became aware of its occupational cause. The Board denied the claim under Workers’ Compensation Law § 40, finding the disease was contracted more than 12 months before disablement. The claimant argued "meat wrapper’s asthma" was not a known condition until 1975. The court affirmed the Board’s decision, citing that the disease's aggravation in employment constituted contraction and that the 12-month rule applied, irrespective of when the claimant gained knowledge of the occupational link.

Meat Wrapper's AsthmaOccupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation LawDisease ContractionDate of DisablementCausal RelationshipAsthma ExacerbationClaim TimelinessAggravation of Pre-existing Condition
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174

The plaintiffs, T & M Meat Fair, Inc. and its owners, filed a class action lawsuit in New York state court against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) unions and affiliated funds, alleging fraud and breach of fiduciary duty related to their participation in ERISA plans. The defendants removed the case to federal court, citing original jurisdiction under ERISA and LMRA. The plaintiffs then moved to remand the case back to state court, arguing that federal jurisdiction was improper and also sought attorneys' fees and costs. The District Court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, finding that federal jurisdiction was proper based on at least one claim arising under ERISA in the amended complaint, and also denied the request for attorneys' fees and costs. The court explicitly stated that Count III, asserting rights under ERISA for Milano, established federal jurisdiction.

ERISALMRARemoval JurisdictionFederal CourtState CourtRemand MotionClass ActionLabor UnionPension FundsHealth Funds
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hayden v. S & W Meat & Poultry

Claimant, a partner in S & W Meat & Poultry, sustained a serious injury. A workers' compensation claim was filed, but the carrier contested coverage, arguing that claimant, as a partner, had not formally elected coverage under Workers' Compensation Law § 54 (8). The Workers' Compensation Board applied estoppel, finding the carrier failed to advise the employer of the election requirement. On appeal, the court reversed this decision, holding that the employer's insurance broker, the Fear agency, was notified of the lack of coverage, and this knowledge is imputed to the employer. The court found insufficient evidence for estoppel and remitted the matter to the Board for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationEstoppelInsurance CoveragePartnershipAgent LiabilityImputed KnowledgePremium RefundAppellate ReviewRemittalWorkers' Compensation Law § 54 (8)
References
5
Case No. ADJ10168186 ADJ10168303
Regular
Mar 17, 2020

JOSEFINA VALDIVIA vs. KING MEAT, INC., ACE/ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision concerning Josefin Valdivia's claims against King Meat, Inc. and ACE/ESIS. While affirming the January 10, 2020 decision, the WCAB amended it to defer specific issues. The determination of whether the injury arose out of and occurred in the course of employment (AOE/COE) is deferred. Furthermore, issues regarding permanent disability and entitlement to future medical treatment are also deferred.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPermanent DisabilityFuture Medical TreatmentWCJ ReportDecision After Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. ADJ2754339, ADJ2982695
Regular
Feb 22, 2023

VIRGINA VASQUEZ vs. KING MEAT, INC., FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION (CIGA)

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration filed by CIGA. CIGA challenged a prior finding that allowed payment for medical treatment and a specific medical-legal report by Dr. Konstat. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found that Dr. Konstat's treatment was reasonable and necessary, and that her 2007 medical-legal report was properly requested. The Board also determined that the prior judge's findings on reasonableness were binding in the subsequent lien trial.

CIGAPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantPrimary Treating PhysicianMedical-Legal ReportsSelf-Procured TreatmentUtilization ReviewLabor Code section 4620Rules 9785(e)(3)Rules 9785(e)(4)
References
4
Case No. ADJ1244874
Regular
Apr 19, 2010

ENRIQUE ROJAS vs. COSTCO

This case involves a meat cutter/wrapper's claim for an industrial injury to his respiratory system, diagnosed as hypersensitivity pneumonitis. The defendant contested the finding of industrial causation, arguing the medical evidence was insufficient. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision, finding that the agreed medical examiner, Dr. Markovitz, established a reasonable medical probability of industrial causation, despite not identifying the precise causative agent. The Board relied on Dr. Markovitz's expert opinion, which utilized a process of elimination and epidemiological considerations to conclude the condition was likely work-related.

Hypersensitivity PneumonitisIndustrial CausationAgreed Medical EvaluatorPulmonologistMeat CutterMeat WrapperRespiratory System InjuryCumulative TraumaProcess of EliminationReasonable Medical Probability
References
3
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02633 [238 AD3d 1242]
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2025

Matter of Epstein v. Waldbaums

Claimant Linda Epstein, a former meat wrapper, sustained a work-related injury in 2011, leading to a permanent partial disability and a 450-week benefit award. Nearing benefit exhaustion, she requested an extreme hardship redetermination under Workers' Compensation Law § 35 (3), which was initially denied by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge. The Workers' Compensation Board reversed, granting her request based on her age, limited education, health issues, and dire financial circumstances. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the finding of extreme financial hardship, warranting reclassification to permanent total or total industrial disability.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityExtreme HardshipWage-Earning CapacityReclassificationPermanent Total DisabilityTotal Industrial DisabilityFinancial HardshipSocial Security DisabilityPension Benefits
References
10
Case No. CV-23-2205
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Linda Epstein

Linda Epstein, a former meat wrapper, with an established claim for work-related injuries, was classified with a permanent partial disability. Prior to the exhaustion of her indemnity benefits, she requested an extreme hardship redetermination under Workers' Compensation Law § 35 (3). After an initial denial by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed the decision and granted the reclassification. The employer and its carrier appealed, arguing that Epstein failed to demonstrate undue extreme hardship. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial evidence that without her workers' compensation benefits, Epstein's financial circumstances would be dire, considering her age (75), limited education, and health issues.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityExtreme HardshipWage-Earning CapacityReclassificationFinancial HardshipSocial Security DisabilityPension BenefitsAppellate ReviewAge Factor
References
7
Case No. ADJ8979705
Regular
Oct 01, 2016

VENANCIO GALLEGOS vs. ROSE & SHORE RITE WAY RR MEAT PACKERS, INCORPORATED/RITE-WAY MEAT PACKERS, INCORPORATED, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's order to further develop the record. This decision was based on the WCJ's premature order to depose the original PQME, Dr. Steiger, before ruling on whether his reports were admissible. The Board found that requiring this deposition without a ruling on Dr. Steiger's availability would be premature and cause irreparable harm. The case is returned to the trial level for a status conference before a new judge to address the PQME dispute and other issues.

Petition for RemovalVacating SubmissionPQME depositionMedical report admissibilityCross-examinationWCJ orderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRecord developmentPrecedentIrreparable harm
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 39 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