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. 2016 NY Slip Op 07300 [144 AD3d 761]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 2016

Mammone v. T.G. Nickel & Associates, LLC

The plaintiff, a maintenance worker, fell from a ladder while attempting to change air filters at Garden City High School. He commenced an action against T.G. Nickel & Associates, LLC, the construction manager, alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court granted summary judgment dismissing these causes of action against Nickel. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, finding that the plaintiff was not engaged in a protected activity under Labor Law § 240 (1), his accident did not involve construction, demolition, or excavation under Labor Law § 241 (6), and Nickel lacked authority to supervise or control the plaintiff's work for the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLadder FallSummary JudgmentLabor Law 200Labor Law 240(1)Labor Law 241(6)Common-Law NegligenceAppellate ReviewConstruction Manager Liability
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nickels v. New York City Housing Authority

The case concerns the legality of the New York City Housing Authority's (Housing Authority) vote to involuntarily transfer its police officers to the New York City Police Department (NYPD) under Civil Service Law § 70 (2). The petitioner, Timothy L. Nickels, representing Housing Police officers, sought to void this transfer and enjoin the Housing Authority, arguing it lacked legal authorization and would harm officers' contractual benefits, including pension and workers' compensation. The court examined whether the Housing Authority constitutes a 'civil division of the state' under Civil Service Law § 70 (2) and its legislative history, concluding that public authorities are excluded. It also determined that legislative action is required to protect employees' constitutionally guaranteed pension and seniority rights, which would be impaired by the proposed merger without such authorization. Consequently, the court granted the petition, permanently enjoining the involuntary transfers and the dissemination of officers' payroll information, and directing the return of any such documentation.

Civil Service LawPublic AuthoritiesPolice TransferPension RightsConstitutional LawLegislative IntentInter-agency MergerCivil Division of StatePublic Employee BenefitsInjunctive Relief
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nickel v. Pilgrim Psychiatric Center

A claimant, injured in 1996, settled a workers' compensation claim in 2001 for a lump sum, from which attorney's fees and child support were deducted. In 2009, the claimant sought to rescind the agreement, alleging a misunderstanding regarding the child support deduction. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board denied rescission, citing Workers' Compensation Law § 32. This court reversed the Board's decision, finding that the 2001 settlement agreement was not validly approved because a mandatory hearing, required at that time, was not held. Consequently, the Board is not precluded from reviewing the agreement, and the matter was remitted for further consideration.

Workers' CompensationSettlement AgreementRescission RequestBoard ApprovalMandatory HearingContinuing JurisdictionChild Support DeductionLump Sum PaymentAppealRemittal
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nickel v. Kings Park Psychiatric Center

The claimant sustained a back injury in 1991, with the case closing in 1992. A second injury in 1996 led to the reopening of the 1991 case, which was later closed in 2000 along with the 1996 case, the latter settling in 2001. In 2006, the claimant applied to reopen the 1991 case due to medical changes, with the carrier arguing that liability had shifted to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. The WCLJ initially rejected the Special Fund's involvement, but the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, finding Section 25-a applicable due to a perceived 1992 "true closing." The Special Fund appealed this ruling. The Appellate Court reversed the Board's decision, determining that the critical "true closing" date was September 2000, not 1992, and remitted the matter for further proceedings to resolve this factual issue.

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesLiability ShiftTrue Closing DateCase ReopeningAppellate ReviewBoard Decision ReversalRemittalBack InjuryMedical Condition Change
References
2
Case No. ADJ7800258 ADJ7800270
Regular
Jun 03, 2013

DEBRA NICKELL vs. PKB INVESTMENTS, INC., dba HOME INSTEAD, CARE WEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended a prior finding. The amended decision clarifies that the applicant met her burden of proof for reaching maximum medical improvement on July 19, 2011, and for a 15% whole person impairment rating based on an Agreed Medical Evaluator's opinion. However, the applicant did not meet her burden of proof for injury to other claimed body parts. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPKB INVESTMENTSINC.HOME INSTEADCARE WEST INSURANCE COMPANYPEGASUS RISK MANAGEMENTDEBRA NICKELLPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactOrder
References
7
Case No. ADJ7697247
Regular
Sep 11, 2013

RIGOBERTO GONZALEZ vs. CHARLES AND MARY NICKEL, dba, REDHILL COFFEE SHOP, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the employer's Petition for Removal, rescinding the WCJ's decision to further develop the record. The Board found that the applicant's request to gather additional medical evidence after the Mandatory Settlement Conference was untimely and lacked a showing of due diligence, as per Labor Code section 5502(d)(3). Furthermore, the WCJ's proposed theory of compensability appeared to diverge from the applicant's stipulated cumulative trauma claim. The case was returned for a decision based on the existing record.

Petition for RemovalFinding & AwardDeferred Injury AOE/COEMedical Record DevelopmentMandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)Pretrial Conference Statement (PTCS)Cumulative TraumaPanel QMEDue DiligenceDiscovery Closure
References
1
Case No. ADJ3156337 (FRE 0209931) ADJ4199467 (FRE 0209932)
Regular
Nov 20, 2008

FRANK FLORES vs. NICKEL'S PAYLESS STORES, WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANIES, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN COMMERCIAL CLAIMS ADMINSITRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an award for a 1999 right foot and ankle injury, specifically addressing the defendant's claims of error in permanent disability calculation without apportionment and the exclusion of medical evidence. The Board intends to admit the Agreed Medical Evaluator's reports into evidence, which the WCJ had previously excluded. This decision will allow the Board to review all relevant medical evidence before making a final determination on apportionment and the applicant's claimed injuries.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryPermanent Partial DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorSubstantial Medical EvidenceAdmissibility of EvidencePetition for ReconsiderationAmended Findings Award and OrderMinutes of Hearing
References
0
Case No. ADJ7083586
Regular
Feb 10, 2015

JOSE PACHECO (Deceased) MARIA ELENA PACHECO (Widow) vs. HAWKER PACIFIC AEROSPACE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the widow's petition for reconsideration of the denial of her claim for death benefits. The applicant failed to prove that her deceased husband's industrial exposure contributed to his death from internal system injuries. The majority adopted the WCJ's report, finding no error in the denial. One commissioner dissented, arguing the record should be further developed regarding the decedent's specific workplace exposures to harmful agents like nickel and chromium, as his employment need only be a contributing cause.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryCumulative TraumaDeath BenefitMachinistNickelChromiumCyanideLiver Cancer
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hoffend & Sons, Inc. v. Rose & Kiernan, Inc.

Plaintiff Hoffend & Sons, Inc. sued its insurance broker, Rose & Kiernan, Inc. and its employee Mark Nickel, alleging failure to procure adequate insurance coverage for a foreign construction project in Argentina. Hoffend claimed it specifically requested coverage for property damage and asserted a special relationship with the broker, which would impose a duty to advise. The Court of Appeals found that Hoffend failed to establish either a specific request for the particular coverage or the existence of a special relationship. Citing the precedent of Murphy v Kuhn, the court emphasized that a broker's duty arises from a specific request for coverage or the need to inform the client of an inability to obtain it, and that a general request is insufficient. Consequently, the Appellate Division's dismissal of the complaint against the broker was affirmed.

Insurance BrokerNegligenceInsurance CoverageSpecial RelationshipProperty DamageForeign ConstructionBuilders Risk PolicyAppellate DivisionContract LawProfessional Liability
References
1
Case No. 2025 NYSlipOp 06668
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 02, 2025

Rivera v. Site 2 DSA Owner, LLC

Plaintiff was injured while lifting a heavy gang box into a truck. The Supreme Court denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240(1) claim and granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. The Appellate Division modified this decision, denying summary judgment to defendants on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim and reinstating it. Furthermore, the Appellate Division granted summary judgment on liability to the plaintiff for his Labor Law § 240(1) claim against specific defendants (Site 2 DSA Owner, LLC, Delancey Street Associates, LLC, and T.G. Nickel & Associates, LLC), while otherwise affirming the lower court's order. The court also noted a contradiction in pleadings regarding ownership by one of the defendants, Delancey Street Associates, LLC.

Labor LawSafe Place to WorkSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityAppellate DivisionGang Box InjuryConstruction AccidentPleading ContradictionOwner LiabilityWorkplace Safety
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 10 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