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. 2017 NY Slip Op 04184 [150 AD3d 1589]
Regular Panel Decision
May 25, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Board v. Program Risk Management, Inc.

The New York State Workers' Compensation Board, acting as administrator and successor to the Community Residence Insurance Savings Plan, initiated legal action against various entities and individuals after the trust became severely underfunded. Defendants include Program Risk Management, Inc. (administrator), PRM Claims Services, Inc. (claims administrator), individual officers of PRM, the Board of Trustees, and Thomas Gosdeck (trust counsel). The plaintiff sought damages for claims such as breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and legal malpractice. The Supreme Court's order partially dismissed some claims and denied others. On cross-appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, modified the Supreme Court's order, notably reversing the dismissal of several breach of fiduciary duty claims and common-law indemnification against PRMCS, while affirming denials of motions to dismiss breach of contract, legal malpractice, and unjust enrichment claims. The court's decision was influenced by recent rulings in State of N.Y. Workers' Compensation Bd. v Wang.

Workers' Compensation LawGroup Self-Insured TrustBreach of ContractBreach of Fiduciary DutyLegal MalpracticeUnjust EnrichmentStatute of LimitationsEquitable EstoppelAlter Ego LiabilityCommon-Law Indemnification
References
20
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 27428
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Bd. v. Compensation Risk Mgrs., LLC

This action was brought by the New York State Workers' Compensation Board (WCB), as an assignee of former members of the Healthcare Industry Trust of New York (HITNY), against Compensation Risk Managers, LLC (CRM), HITNY trustees, and auditing firm UHY LLP. The WCB alleged mismanagement, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent auditing, leading to the Trust's insolvency. Defendants moved to dismiss on grounds of standing, statute of limitations, and pleading particularity. The court dismissed certain derivative claims and negligent misrepresentation claims against some trustees due to standing issues and statute of limitations. All claims against UHY LLP were dismissed for lack of a near-privity relationship or prior precedent. An implied indemnity claim against the trustees was sustained. The WCB's cross-motion to consolidate related actions was denied.

Workers' Compensation LawGroup Self-Insured Trust (GSIT)Fiduciary DutyNegligenceNegligent MisrepresentationStatute of LimitationsStandingDerivative ActionImplied IndemnityAuditing Firm Liability
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2000

AIU Insurance v. Unicover Managers, Inc.

This case involves plaintiff insurance companies, AIG, seeking a declaration that defendant ReliaStar Life Insurance Company was bound to reinsure AIG for certain workers' compensation risks based on reinsurance slips signed by Unicover Managers, Inc., ReliaStar's managing general underwriter. The Supreme Court, New York County, dismissed AIG's complaint against ReliaStar and Unicover, and ReliaStar's third-party complaint against E.W. Blanch Company. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, finding that the parties' correspondence and conduct established that reinsurance would only be bound upon ReliaStar's own signature, negating any actual or apparent authority of Unicover or ratification by ReliaStar. Estoppel and misrepresentation claims against both defendants were also dismissed. The judgment was modified to explicitly dismiss all remaining cross claims and counterclaims, and the initial dismissal was otherwise affirmed.

Reinsurance AgreementSummary JudgmentContract InterpretationAgency AuthorityApparent AuthorityRatificationEstoppelMisrepresentationWorkers' Compensation RisksCross Claims
References
3
Case No. ADJ158605 (RIV 0028842)
Regular
Nov 14, 2008

CHARLES WEBSTER vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE RISK MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Charles Webster's petition for reconsideration in his case against County of Riverside Risk Management. The Board adopted the findings and reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge in their decision. This order formally denies Webster's request to have the case reconsidered.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Denying ReconsiderationWCJ ReportPetition for ReconsiderationTapia v. Skill Masters StaffingAppeals Board en bancADJ158605RIV 0028842County of Riverside Risk ManagementCharles Webster
References
1
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00957 [136 AD3d 783]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2016

Sanchez v. Metro Builders Corp.

Juan P. Sanchez initiated a personal injury lawsuit after falling three stories from a roof during snow removal, alleging violations of Labor Law sections 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6) against general contractor Metro Builders Corp. and subcontractor JMZ Builders, Inc. Metro, in turn, sought indemnification from JMZ and Sanchez's employers, Cocos Brothers. The Appellate Division ultimately granted Sanchez's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability against Metro, finding Metro to be a statutory agent of the owner. Concurrently, Metro's cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing claims under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence was granted, while its claims under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) were denied on the merits. Metro's indemnification claims against JMZ and Cocos Brothers were dismissed as untimely.

Workplace FallConstruction AccidentLabor Law ViolationsSummary Judgment GrantedGeneral ContractorStatutory AgentIndemnification ClaimsAppellate ReviewPersonal InjurySafety Devices
References
20
Case No. ADJ3968337 (LAO 0844136) ADJ4336885 (LAO 0805868) ADJ672008 (LAO 0805870)
Regular
Sep 24, 2015

ARMIDA BELTRAN vs. MCDONALD'S, HAZELRIGG RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration by McDonald's and Hazelrigg Risk Management Services regarding deposition attorney fees. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is dismissing the petition because the petitioner has withdrawn it. This withdrawal is consistent with a prior WCJ order rescinding the attorney fee orders, allowing for further discovery on deposition attorney fee payments. Consequently, the petition for reconsideration is dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJrescindeddeposition attorney fee ordersCIGAOrder of Rescissioncrossed in the mailwithdrawn petitionfurther discoveryprior payment
References
0
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00302 [135 AD3d 572]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 2016

Domaszowec v. Residential Management Group LLC

Plaintiff Tracy Domaszowec's decedent died from a fall while cleaning a window on the 13th floor of an apartment building. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified a Supreme Court order, granting plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on her Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Residential Management Group LLC and 40 Fifth Avenue Corporation (40 Fifth defendants), the building owner and manager. The court found the decedent was engaged in "commercial window washing," thereby making Labor Law § 240 (1) applicable. The court affirmed the dismissal of Labor Law § 202 against Veronica Bulgari and Stephen Haimo due to lack of exclusive control, and common-law negligence claims against T&L Contracting of N.Y., Inc. and Greenpoint Woodworking Inc. due to the lack of an exception to the contractual obligation rule. Issues of fact precluded summary judgment on negligence claims against Panorama Windows, Ltd., and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was deemed inapplicable to certain defendants.

Window cleaner fatalityScaffold LawSummary judgment appealAppellate Division First DepartmentCommercial vs. routine window washingLabor Law applicabilityContractual tort liabilityRes ipsa loquitur in negligencePunitive damages dismissalExpert witness evidence
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Genen v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad

The dissenting opinion addresses the direct liability of Hunter Excavating Corp., a snow removal contractor, for a plaintiff's personal injuries after slipping on ice at a Metro-North station. The dissent argues that Hunter did not owe a direct duty to the plaintiff, as its contract with Metro-North (the landowner) was not a comprehensive maintenance agreement that displaced Metro-North's duty, nor did Hunter's actions launch a new force of harm. The opinion distinguishes this case from precedents where landowners or contractors performing negligent removal were held liable, emphasizing the lack of an independent duty or detrimental reliance by the plaintiff. Furthermore, the dissent contends that Hunter's contract specified service upon notification, and thus no additional duty to continually monitor conditions was imposed. Finally, the dissenting judges considered requests for summary judgment dismissing claims against Hunter (third-party action) and Metro-North (plaintiff's primary action), finding them without merit due to unresolved questions of fact regarding notice to Metro-North and Hunter's contractual indemnification obligation.

Snow removal liabilityIndependent contractor liabilityPremises liabilityDirect liabilityContractual dutySummary judgmentDissenting opinionPersonal injuryNegligenceThird-party action
References
10
Case No. FRE 0200624
Regular
Sep 04, 2007

Amber Osborn vs. Community Medical Centers, Tristar Risk Management

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by California Pharmacy Management because it appealed a non-final order, warning of potential sanctions. Conversely, the Board granted reconsideration for PSPM Ripu Arora, M.D., rescinding the dismissal of its lien claim and remanding the matter for further proceedings. This decision addresses two separate lien claimant challenges to administrative law judge orders.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsDismissalNotice of IntentionMandatory Settlement ConferenceFinal OrderSanctionsRescindReturn to Trial Level
References
0
Case No. ADJ2987188 (LBO 0277672) ADJ6543172
Regular
Sep 15, 2015

LUPE CHAVEZ vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This order denies Lupe Chavez's Petition for Reconsideration in her workers' compensation case against the County of Los Angeles and Tristar Risk Management. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report. Therefore, the denial of reconsideration stands.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportDenying ReconsiderationCounty of Los AngelesTristar Risk ManagementCase Number ADJ2987188Case Number ADJ6543172San FranciscoCalifornia
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 3,771 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