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
Feb 20, 2024

Brown v. Window King LLC

Plaintiff Mary Elena Brown sustained personal injuries when a screwdriver dropped by a window installer, Wilson Rivera, hit her head in a parking lot of a condominium building managed by Stillman Management Inc. The installer was working for Window King LLC. Stillman moved for summary judgment, arguing it owed no duty, but the court found questions of fact regarding its control over the premises. Window King also sought summary judgment, contending Rivera was an independent contractor, but issues of fact arose regarding Rivera's employment status and potential vicarious liability. The Supreme Court initially granted Window King's motion and denied Stillman's. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, reinstating Stillman's cross-claims against Window King, and otherwise affirmed, finding unresolved factual disputes regarding both Stillman's duty of maintenance and Window King's potential vicarious liability for Rivera's negligence.

Summary judgmentPersonal injuryVicarious liabilityRespondeat superiorIndependent contractorProperty managementPremises liabilityAppellate reviewCross-claimsTort liability
References
10
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02559
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2022

Ortega v. Panther Siding & Windows, Inc.

The plaintiff Rene Ortega was injured after falling from a roof while working as a foreman for a subcontractor, Golden Hammer Construction Group, Corp., which was working for Panther Siding & Windows, Inc. Ortega sued Panther Siding & Windows, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law sections and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed this decision. The court found that Panther Siding & Windows, Inc., established it was neither the general contractor nor an agent of the owner at the accident site, thus lacking the nondelegable duty under Labor Law § 240 (1), and Ortega failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Personal InjuryFall from heightLabor LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewContractor LiabilitySubcontractorConstruction AccidentElevation-related riskSafety devices
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 04, 2015

In re Barrier Window Systems, Inc.

Barrier Window Systems, Inc. appealed a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which found Barrier liable for additional unemployment insurance contributions for its installers. Barrier, which transitioned from installing to selling building products and arranging installations via subcontractors, argued it was not a contractor under the Fair Play Act and that its installers were independent contractors. The Board determined that Barrier continued to engage in construction by arranging installations and that the installers did not meet all three criteria of the Fair Play Act's ABC test for independent contractor status. The Court affirmed the Board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence, thereby upholding Barrier's liability.

Unemployment InsuranceIndependent ContractorWorker MisclassificationConstruction Industry Fair Play ActLabor LawABC TestEmployment RelationshipSubstantial EvidenceAdministrative AppealStatutory Presumption
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Williamson v. 16 West 57th Street Co.

Bernard Williamson, a window cleaner employed by Audobon Window Cleaning, Inc., sustained grave injuries after falling from a ledge while cleaning windows at premises owned by 16 West 57th Street Co. and leased by Mother Works, Inc. Williamson, through his guardian, sued the owner and lessee alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 202, and 240. The Supreme Court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiff on Labor Law § 240 liability. The defendants appealed, contending Labor Law § 240 was inapplicable to window cleaners and preempted by Labor Law § 202. The appellate court affirmed that Labor Law § 240 applies to professional window cleaners and is not preempted by Labor Law § 202, but granted summary judgment to the appellants dismissing the Labor Law § 202 cause of action due to a lack of demonstrated violation.

Window Cleaner InjuryFall AccidentLabor Law ApplicationStatutory PreemptionBuilding Owner LiabilityLessee LiabilitySummary Judgment RulingWorkplace SafetyElevation-Related RiskNew York Appellate Court
References
23
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

McGill v. Qudsi

This case addresses liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) for a plaintiff who fell from a ladder while removing a second-story window. The court clarified that while the ladder itself might have been adequate for elevation, the defendant's failure to provide a separate safety device for handling and lowering the 40-50 pound window constituted a distinct elevation-related hazard. This omission was found to be a statutory violation and the proximate cause of the plaintiff's accident. The court further emphasized that claims of the plaintiff's contributory negligence or carelessness were irrelevant to establishing liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). The lower court's order was affirmed.

Labor Law Section 240(1)Elevation HazardLadder FallWindow Removal AccidentSafety Device FailureProximate CauseContributory Negligence ImmaterialStatutory ViolationWorkplace InjuryConstruction Site Safety
References
23
Case No. 2011 NY Slip Op 30064(U)
Regular Panel Decision

Arias v. Skyline Windows, Inc.

A plaintiff maintenance worker was injured when he slipped on broken glass and fell, resulting in a trash container rolling over his foot. The defendant, a company hired for window replacement, failed to demonstrate its employees were not working at the location until after the accident, which was crucial for its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The court found the defendant's director's affidavit inconsistent with his deposition and lacking familiarity with the project. Furthermore, the plaintiff's opposition successfully raised triable issues of fact, supported by testimony from the plaintiff and a coworker regarding the defendant's employees' presence prior to the accident.

Personal InjurySlip and FallSummary JudgmentPrima FacieMaintenance WorkerPremises LiabilityNegligenceAppellate ReviewWitness TestimonyBusiness Records
References
4
Case No. 2014 NY Slip Op 08236
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2014

Matter of Panorama Windows, Ltd. v. 350 E. 55th St., LLC

This case involves an appeal concerning an arbitration award that was initially confirmed by the Supreme Court, New York County. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed this judgment. The court found no evidence that the arbitrator's conversation with the petitioner prejudiced the respondent. Furthermore, the award of damages for additional work, granted pursuant to the respondent's oral directives, was determined not to be in manifest disregard of the law or to exceed the arbitrator's established powers. Consequently, the appellate court upheld the prior decision.

Arbitration AwardContract DisputeAffirmed JudgmentAppellate ReviewOral DirectivesArbitrator PowersPrejudiceManifest Disregard of LawSupreme Court ConfirmationAppellate Division
References
3
Case No. ADJ781963 (LAO 0886828) ADJ3530912 (LAO 0887054)
Regular
Feb 24, 2011

FERMIN BAUTISTA vs. MILGARD WINDOWS & DOORS, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed untimely, one day after the jurisdictional deadline. Furthermore, the applicant failed to properly serve the lien claimant, the Employment Development Department, as required by law. Even if the petition were timely, the Board would have denied it based on the Judge's credible findings, particularly regarding the applicant's credibility concerning prior injuries. The original award found a cumulative injury only to the applicant's low back, awarding 7% permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMilgard Windows & DoorsTravelers Property Casualty Company of AmericaJoint Findings and AwardCumulative Industrial InjuryLow Back InjuryCompensable InjuryPetition for ReconsiderationTimelinessJurisdictional Time Limit
References
3
Case No. ADJ7464284
Regular
Aug 21, 2014

MIGUEL ANGEL GARCIA vs. INTERNATIONAL WINDOW, ZURICH NORTH AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior award finding that Miguel Angel Garcia sustained industrial injuries to his back, neck, shoulders, and arms from cumulative trauma and a specific incident while employed by International Window. The Board found Dr. Donohue's medical reports constituted substantial evidence supporting the cumulative trauma finding and ongoing temporary disability. The Board also ruled that Garcia was permitted to select a new primary treating physician for his cumulative trauma claim, as he had not been properly notified of his prior physician's final determination for the specific injury. The defendant's contentions regarding lack of medical evidence, ongoing temporary disability, and improper physician selection were rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCumulative Trauma InjuryTemporary Total DisabilityStatute of LimitationsAffirmative DefenseMedical EvidencePrimary Treating PhysicianDispute Resolution ProceduresFindings Award and Order
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 188 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