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. 2019 NY Slip Op 01046 [169 AD3d 747]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 13, 2019

Barrios v. 19-19 24th Ave. Co., LLC

The plaintiff, Sergio Barrios, sustained personal injuries when a differential block and chain fell on his head while preparing a hoisting apparatus at the defendants' premises. He sued 19-19 24th Avenue Company, LLC, et al., alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied both parties' motions for summary judgment. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the order. It granted the plaintiff summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, finding the repair work fell under its purview. It also granted the defendants summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim, ruling that the plaintiff's work did not constitute construction, demolition, or excavation.

Personal InjuryLabor LawScaffolding LawGravity HazardSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewRepair WorkHoisting ApparatusWorkplace SafetyStatutory Interpretation
References
8
Case No. ADJ10372880
Regular
Aug 24, 2018

JOE M. INGALLS vs. CITY OF RIVERSIDE

This case involved applicant Joe Ingalls seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision. The WCAB granted reconsideration to correct a typographical error in the original Findings and Award, changing the cumulative trauma period from November 19, 1972, to November 19, 1973. The Board affirmed the original award of 59% permanent partial disability at 2004 compensation rates. Applicant's primary contention that the compensation rates were incorrectly applied was implicitly denied by the affirmation of the award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent Partial DisabilityCompensation RatesCumulative TraumaTypographical ErrorDecision After ReconsiderationFire EngineerIndustrial Injury
References
0
Case No. ADJ7836843, ADJ8319146, ADJ8319196, ADJ8319319
Regular
Jul 15, 2025

JOSE VAZQUEZ vs. VALLEJO MINI MARKET AND GAS STATIONS INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Applicant Jose Vazquez timely petitioned for reconsideration of the Findings and Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge on November 19, 2024. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to study the factual and legal issues. Following a commissioners' settlement conference, the parties filed an executed compromise and release and a proposed order on June 26, 2025. To expedite review and approval, the Board rescinded the November 19, 2024 Findings and Order and remanded the matter to the WCJ to consider the compromise and release and proposed order, with further proceedings as deemed appropriate.

ADJFindings and OrderReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseProposed OrderRescindRemandWCJCommissionerWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kelley v. Lynaugh

This case involves appeals and cross-appeals concerning the validity of various absentee and special ballots cast in a November 5, 2013, general election for Councilmember, 4th Council District, Town of Brookhaven. Constance M. Kepert appealed parts of a Supreme Court order, and Michael A. Loguercio, Jr., cross-appealed other parts. The appellate court modified the lower court's determinations regarding the casting and canvassing of specific ballots. The modifications were based on voter intent derived from ballot markings, as well as adherence to Election Law regarding signature verification and timely ballot receipt. Ultimately, the court directed the Suffolk County Board of Elections not to cast or canvass ballots designated as exhibits 2, 8, and 17, and to cast and canvass ballots designated as exhibits 3, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24.

Election DisputeBallot ValidityVoter IntentAbsentee BallotsSpecial BallotsCanvassing ProceduresElection Law Article 16Suffolk County ElectionsAppellate ReviewGeneral Election 2013
References
8
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 00838 [224 AD3d 1066]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2024

Matter of Fernandez v. New York City Tr. Auth.

Brenda Fernandez, claimant, appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board regarding the death benefits claim for her husband, a track inspector, who died in November 2020 after contracting COVID-19 in March 2020. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found the COVID-19 injury work-related, but the Board later disallowed the claim. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, citing that the claimant failed to meet her burden of demonstrating that the decedent contracted COVID-19 in the course of his employment. The court emphasized the requirement for specific exposure or an elevated risk in the work environment, which was not sufficiently proven.

COVID-19Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsCausationEmployment InjuryTrack InspectorPulmonary EmbolismCardiac ArrestAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
9
Case No. CV-23-0309
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Brenda Fernandez

Claimant Brenda Fernandez appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying death benefits to her late husband, John Fernandez, a track inspector who contracted COVID-19. John died in November 2020, purportedly due to cardiac arrest and pulmonary embolism, after testing positive for COVID-19 in March 2020. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a work-related injury, the Board later modified and disallowed the claim. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that the claimant failed to meet her burden of demonstrating that decedent contracted COVID-19 in the course of his employment. The Court emphasized the lack of substantial evidence regarding specific exposure or elevated risk in the workplace.

COVID-19Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsCausal RelationEmployment ExposureSubstantial EvidenceTrack InspectorPulmonary EmbolismCardiac ArrestAppellate ReviewBurden of Proof
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 18, 1983

Claim of Kearsch v. Town of Hempstead

This case involves an appeal of a Workers' Compensation Board decision concerning the timely filing of a C-250 reimbursement form by a self-insured employer from the Special Fund. Although the C-250 form was missing from the board's file when permanency was established on November 19, 1981, evidence indicated the Special Fund was aware of the claim prior to this date, having attended a hearing on November 20, 1980, and a conference on February 21, 1980. The board concluded the form had been timely served but merely misplaced. The court affirmed the board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence.

C-250 FormReimbursement ClaimSpecial FundSelf-Insured EmployerTimely FilingPermanency DeterminationWorkers' Compensation BoardSubstantial EvidenceAppeal DecisionMisplaced Document
References
0
Case No. 19
Regular Panel Decision

White v. Pacifica Foundation

Plaintiff Bernard White, an African-American man, sued his former employer, Pacifica Foundation, and board member Stephen M. Brown, alleging racial discrimination and retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL. White, a program director at WBAI, a radio station owned by Pacifica, claimed Brown sent racially charged emails influencing his termination. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The court found that Brown was not personally involved in White's suspension or termination and was not an 'employer' or 'employee/agent' under state and city human rights laws. Furthermore, the court determined that Pacifica provided legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for White's termination, citing declining fundraising and listenership, and complaints of his abusive behavior. The court granted summary judgment for both defendants, concluding that White failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation.

Racial DiscriminationRetaliationEmployment LawSummary JudgmentNew York State Human Rights LawNew York City Human Rights Law42 U.S.C. Section 1981Program DirectorTerminationWorkplace Harassment
References
218
Case No. MISC. NO. 264
En Banc
Oct 27, 2020

Workers' Compensation Appeals Board vs. State of California

The Appeals Board rescinds its suspension of WCAB Rules 10755, 10756, and 10888, which had previously suspended the dismissal of cases for failure to appear due to the COVID-19 emergency.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCOVID-19State of EmergencyEn BancWCAB RulesSuspensionRescindsDismissalFailure to AppearApplication
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 28, 1990

Sternklar v. 19 E. 80th St. Associates

Tenants Theodore Sternklar and Adrienne Wincor-Sternklar leased a rent-stabilized apartment from landlord 19 E. 80th St. Associates. They undertook various alterations with the landlord's permission. When the landlord required window replacement, tenants faced significant costs to remove and reinstall their custom items. Tenants sought a declaratory judgment to define the parties' rights and obligations. The lower court granted summary judgment to the landlord, dismissing the complaint and granting counterclaims for unauthorized renovations. The appellate court reversed, finding numerous material issues of fact regarding the landlord's approval of alterations, the nature of certain installations, and the status of items claimed as unauthorized, thus precluding summary judgment.

Rent stabilizationApartment alterationsSummary judgmentFactual disputesLease agreementDeclaratory judgmentLandlord-tenant disputeAppellate reviewNew York lawProperty dispute
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 1,087 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