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
Mar 04, 2002

Masciotta v. Morse Diesel International, Inc.

Plaintiff James Masciotta, a carpenter employed by W. Property Resources, Inc. (Property), was injured in a construction accident involving a ladder. Morse Diesel International, Inc. (Morse), the project manager, moved for partial summary judgment seeking contractual indemnification from Property. The Supreme Court denied Morse's motion, but the Appellate Court unanimously reversed this decision. The court found that the indemnification provision in the subcontract between Morse and Property was enforceable, as Masciotta's injuries arose from Property's work and the use of the ladder, and there was no evidence of Morse's active negligence. General Obligations Law § 5-322.1 did not bar enforcement because Morse was held strictly liable under Labor Law § 240 (1) without its own negligence.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentConstruction AccidentLabor LawLadder FallSubcontractor LiabilityGeneral ContractorActive NegligenceStrict LiabilityGeneral Obligations Law
References
15
Case No. ADJ8052488
Regular
Jun 25, 2013

MARIA FLORES vs. MORSE, GEISLER, CALLISTER AND KARLIN, LLP, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition to allow further study of the factual and legal issues. The central dispute concerns whether third-party assignees of medical provider billings are entitled to payment for services rendered before January 1, 2013, under Labor Code section 4903.8. The Administrative Law Judge initially ruled in favor of the lien claimants, finding the statute inapplicable to pre-2013 assignments, but the Board has now reopened the case for a more thorough review.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionElectronic Adjudication Management SystemReport and RecommendationPetitioners' ContentionsThird Party AssigneeMedical Providers
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Scannell v. Karlin

Patricia Scannell, a Town of Greenburgh police officer, was injured by an automobile during employment. The Town paid her salary, benefits, and medical expenses. Scannell settled her lawsuit against the tortfeasor, Anne Karlin, for $110,000 without informing the Town. The Town subsequently discontinued her benefits and sought reimbursement for medical expenses and payment of the settlement balance into court, asserting a workers' compensation lien. Scannell applied to extinguish the lien, arguing the settlement was for pain and suffering. The Supreme Court granted Scannell's application and denied the Town's cross-application. On appeal, the order was reversed; the appellate court found that the Town had a valid lien under Workers’ Compensation Law § 29, even against sums for pain and suffering, and Scannell failed to obtain the required approval for the settlement or demonstrate reasonableness and lack of prejudice to the Town. The matter was remitted for the entry of an appropriate judgment.

Workers' Compensation LienSettlement ApprovalThird-Party TortfeasorGeneral Municipal LawAppellate ReviewReimbursementMedical ExpensesNunc Pro Tunc ApplicationPrejudiceStatutory Interpretation
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Morse v. Weingarten

This case involves a securities fraud class action where plaintiffs, shareholders of First Capital Holdings Corp., alleged that defendant Michael Milken violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, Rule 10b-5, and committed common law fraud and negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiffs claimed Milken, through his 'Daisy Chain' scheme, caused First Capital to invest heavily in junk bonds, leading to its collapse and misleading statements about its financial health. Milken moved to dismiss all claims under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) and 9(b) for failure to state a claim and failure to plead fraud with particularity, and to strike portions of the complaint under Rule 12(f). The court granted Milken's motion to dismiss all claims, finding that Morse failed to adequately allege a primary violation of Section 10(b) due to a lack of 'in connection with' and causation, insufficient knowledge for aider and abettor liability, insufficient control for control person liability, and inadequate pleading of conspiracy. The common law fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims were also dismissed for similar reasons, and the court granted the motion to strike references to Milken's criminal conviction and income as immaterial.

Securities FraudClass Action LawsuitMotion to DismissFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b)Aiding and AbettingControl Person LiabilityConspiracyCommon Law FraudNegligent Misrepresentation
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Argento v. Morse-Diesel International

The Supreme Court of New York County rendered a judgment on October 6, 1998, after a jury trial, granting the plaintiff's Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and defendants' common-law indemnification claim against third-party defendant Fortunato Sons, Inc., while denying the plaintiff's motion to set aside the damages award as insufficient. The appellate court modified this judgment, vacating the damages award for past pain and suffering and remanding the matter for a new trial solely on this issue. The court affirmed the judgment regarding common-law indemnification, finding Morse-Diesel's liability solely statutory under Labor Law § 240 (1), without evidence of direction or control over work. Claims by Fortunato regarding a time-bar and the anti-subrogation rule were deemed unavailing due to waiver and lack of evidence, respectively.

Labor LawConstruction site accidentDirected verdictIndemnificationThird-party actionDamages awardPain and sufferingAppellate reviewRemandJury verdict
References
3
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 04013
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 02, 2025

Octobre v. Soiefer

Plaintiff Edwen Octobre sought damages for personal injuries sustained on October 22, 2017, when he fell from a ladder on premises managed by 56 Main Street Condominium and owned by Sholom Dov-Ber Soiefer and Sholom Potash. The ladder belonged to Congregation Karlin Stolin, a tenant of a neighboring property. Octobre asserted a common-law negligence claim, alleging a defective ladder. The defendants moved for summary judgment, contending they neither owed a duty of care, supplied the ladder, nor had actual or constructive notice of any defect. The plaintiff cross-moved to strike Congregation Karlin Stolin's answer for spoliation of evidence. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to all defendants and denied the plaintiff's cross-motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, concluding that the defendants successfully demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the plaintiff failed to present a triable issue of fact or establish spoliation.

NegligenceCommon-Law NegligenceFall from LadderSummary JudgmentSpoliation of EvidenceDuty of CareProperty Owner LiabilityPremises LiabilityAppellate ReviewProcedural Law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2004

Castiglione v. E.A. Morse & Co.

The plaintiff, a former custodian, developed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after prolonged exposure to 'Vandal-X' at Kingston High School between 1990 and 2000. Despite minor symptoms in earlier years, significant illness and diagnosis occurred in July 1999 following extensive product use. In May 2002, the plaintiff sued the defendant, the product's manufacturer/distributor, for negligent manufacture and distribution, asserting personal injury. The defendant sought summary judgment, claiming the action was time-barred under CPLR 214-c (2). However, the Supreme Court denied the motion, ruling the action was timely as the statute of limitations began when the primary condition was discovered. The appellate court affirmed this decision, agreeing that earlier isolated symptoms were insufficient to trigger the statute of limitations.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsToxic ExposureChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseNegligent ManufactureNegligent DistributionProduct LiabilityDiscovery RuleCPLR 214-c
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 10, 1993

Gramigna v. Morse Diesel, Inc.

A bricklayer, referred to as 'Plaintiff,' was injured on a scaffold at a work site owned by defendant Keio Gijuku, where defendant Joint Venture was the general contractor. A plank on the scaffold broke, causing the plaintiff to become lodged against a wall. The IAS court granted summary judgment on liability under Labor Law §240(1). On appeal, Joint Venture argued there was no statutory violation because the plaintiff did not fall to the ground. The appellate court rejected this argument, holding that the incident involved an elevation-related risk. However, due to the plaintiff's pre-existing hip condition, the court modified the original order to grant Joint Venture's request for further discovery, while otherwise affirming the summary judgment on liability.

scaffolding accidentLabor Law § 240(1)elevation risksummary judgmentliabilitypre-existing conditionfurther discoveryconstruction accidenthip injuryappellate review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Buffa v. Morse-Diesel, Inc.

The claimant suffered two back injuries in 1969 and 1978 while working for the same employer. The carrier, insuring the employer for both incidents, applied to reopen the 1969 case to apportion liability for the current disability. The Workers' Compensation Board denied this application, citing the carrier's failure to request reopening within a reasonable time as stipulated by 12 NYCRR 300.14 (b). The court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board's denial was neither arbitrary, capricious, nor an abuse of discretion, distinguishing the case from precedents related to the Statute of Limitations against the Special Fund.

Back InjuryApportionment of LiabilityReopening CaseAdministrative DiscretionTimeliness of ApplicationWorkers' CompensationAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionStatute of LimitationsHerniated Disc
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 04, 1978

Hasten v. Morse Electro Products Corp.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision that authorized a double indemnity award under section 14-a of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The claimant, who was 17 years old, misrepresented his age as 18 when applying for employment, and the employer did not request his working papers. A compensable injury subsequently occurred, and the Board found the employer in violation of Labor Law sections 132 and 135, which require minors under 18 to present an employment certificate. The court affirmed the decision, ruling that the employer's failure to see the work permit constituted a violation of the Labor Law, thereby justifying the double compensation, despite the employment being otherwise permissible. The court noted the strictness of the law but was bound by precedent.

Workers' CompensationMinor EmploymentDouble IndemnityLabor Law ViolationEmployment CertificateWork PermitAge MisrepresentationAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationEducation Law
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 15 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