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
Nov 18, 1975

In re the Arbitration between Local 100, Transport Workers Union of America & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority

The Supreme Court, New York County, issued a judgment on November 18, 1975, which was subsequently and unanimously affirmed. The affirmation was based on the original opinion rendered by Justice Spiegel at Special Term. The appellate decision did not award any costs or disbursements. Justices Stevens, Markewich, Lupiano, Silverman, and Lynch all concurred with the affirmation.

Supreme CourtNew York CountyAppellate DecisionAffirmedConcurrenceJudicial OpinionNo CostsNo DisbursementsPanel ReviewSpecial Term
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 1978

Claim of Spasiano v. Empire City Iron Works

The claimant, a mechanic hired in 1974, suffered a low back injury at work in November 1974. He had a pre-existing medical condition, having undergone subtotal gastrectomy in 1965. The employer's insurance carrier filed a C-250 seeking reimbursement from the Special Fund, alleging a pre-existing permanent physical impairment. To claim reimbursement, it needed to be established that the employer hired or continued the claimant with knowledge of the impairment and a good faith belief in its permanency, and that the impairment materially and substantially increased the disability. Conflicting medical opinions were presented regarding whether the claimant's prior stomach condition materially and substantially increased his disability. The Workers' Compensation Board found, based on medical evidence including Dr. Lehv's report, that the prior stomach condition did not materially and substantially increase the disability. This finding, supported by substantial evidence, led to the affirmation of the Board's decision, discharging the Special Fund from liability.

Workers' Compensation BoardSpecial Fund LiabilityPre-existing ConditionSubtotal GastrectomyLow Back InjuryMaterially and Substantially Greater DisabilityMedical EvidenceReimbursementEmployabilityPermanency
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 12, 1982

Naples v. Daubert Chemical Co.

This case involves multiple motions for a change of venue. An order entered June 23, 1981, denying defendant’s motion for a change of venue to Richmond County, was affirmed. An appeal from an order entered April 28, 1982, which denied a motion to change venue to Orange County, was dismissed as superseded. Finally, an order entered November 12, 1982, denying defendant’s motion for renewal of the April 28, 1982 order, was reversed. Upon renewal, the motion to change venue to Orange County was granted, as there was no nexus between New York County and the cause of action, and the accident occurred in Orange County where the plaintiff resided.

Change of VenueDiscretionary RulingSitus of ActionPlaintiff's ResidenceAttorney ConvenienceAppellate ReviewMotion for RenewalSupreme CourtNew York CountyOrange County
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 1991

In re Lenny McN.

The Family Court in Bronx County issued an order on November 18, 1991, directing the disclosure of a social worker's entire casework file to an intervenor-respondent. This social worker was called as a witness by the law guardian for the infants. The appellate court unanimously reversed this order, finding the social worker's testimony regarding prior file use too equivocal to support a wholesale waiver of confidentiality and work product privileges. The court emphasized the protection against disclosure of mental impressions of a party's representative, classifying a social worker employed by a law guardian as such a representative. The case was remanded for a continuation of the dispositional hearing, with further discovery limited unless the law guardian seeks to elicit an adverse expert opinion from the social worker.

Family LawDisclosureConfidentiality PrivilegeWork Product ImmunitySocial Worker TestimonyChild CustodyFamily Court ProceedingDiscovery LimitationsAppellate ReviewWaiver of Privilege
References
2
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. ADJ3745700 (OXN 0128625) ADJ6812951
Regular
Jan 09, 2012

PAUL HARBER vs. PGP INC, CNA INSURANCE COMPANY, VARGAS EXCAVATING INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted Paul Harber's petition for reconsideration to address a potential issue with its timeliness. While the petition was signed on November 7, 2011, there's a discrepancy between EAMS filing dates (November 7 and November 8). The Board is issuing a notice of intention to dismiss unless Harber provides proof of timely filing on or before November 7, 2011. Failure to provide this proof will result in dismissal of the petition as untimely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings Award and OrderWCJEAMSFiling DateTimelinessNotice of Intention to DismissBatch IDOliver v. Structural Services
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lomuscio v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority

Claimant, a bus driver, sustained work-related neck and back injuries in 1993 and 1994, for which she received workers' compensation benefits. She later experienced increased neck discomfort in August 1996 and, in November 1996, while operating a bus, heard a popping sound in her neck, leading to excruciating pain, with a subsequent MRI revealing disc herniations and neuroforaminal stenosis. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Board concluded her partial disability stemmed from a "new accident" in November 1996, not an exacerbation of prior injuries, and denied continuing benefits. On appeal, the Court found insufficient evidence to solely attribute the partial disability to the November 1996 accident, noting prior medical findings consistent with degenerative changes before the November incident. Consequently, the Board's decision was reversed, and the matter was remitted for further proceedings to determine the causation of her partial disability.

Workers' CompensationPartial DisabilityWork-Related InjuryBus DriverNeck InjuryBack InjuryMRI StudyDisc HerniationNeuroforaminal StenosisOsteophyte
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sheahan v. Brady

Plaintiff Danielle Sheahan, a white woman, was terminated from her position at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in April 1992, after being hired in May 1991. The defendant, the Secretary of the Treasury, claimed she was fired for submitting an altered college transcript. However, the plaintiff alleged racial and color discrimination, asserting that her mostly Black co-workers and supervisors conspired against her, fabricating the transcript alteration accusation. Sheahan pursued administrative remedies, first with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), which dismissed her complaint for lack of jurisdiction on October 16, 1992. Subsequently, she filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which also dismissed her case on October 22, 1992, based on the erroneous belief that an MSPB appeal was still pending. Plaintiff then filed a civil suit in federal court on November 12, 1992. Critically, on November 9, 1992, the Treasury Department had filed a Request to Reopen the EEOC's October 22 decision. The court examined the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16, specifically concerning the exhaustion of administrative remedies and the finality of EEOC actions. Under 29 C.F.R. § 1613.234, a timely request to reopen by either party renders an EEOC decision non-final for the purpose of initiating a civil action. Consequently, the defendant's request to reopen on November 9, 1992, made the EEOC's October 22 decision non-final before Sheahan filed her lawsuit on November 12, 1992. Therefore, the court concluded it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The court granted the defendant's motion, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint without prejudice, and suggested that either party could renew a request to reopen the EEOC decision, anticipating it would be granted given the EEOC's original erroneous finding.

Federal employment discriminationTitle VIICivil Rights ActRacial discriminationColor discriminationWrongful terminationAdministrative exhaustionEEOC decision finalitySubject matter jurisdictionMotion to dismiss
References
11
Case No. ADJ2534619 (MON 0255706)
Regular
Jun 10, 2010

RUBY YARYAN vs. YOUR STAFF, INC.; SENIOR PSYCHOLOGY SERVICES; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE, In Liquidation; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND; and COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted By TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by co-defendant County of Los Angeles. The petition sought review of a Workers' Compensation Judge's finding that two injuries were inextricably intertwined. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition as untimely filed. Despite a dispute over initial service, the petitioner admitted receiving the decision on November 2, 2010, making their petition due on November 22, 2010. Since the petition was filed on November 30, 2010, it was beyond the statutory deadline and the Board lacked jurisdiction to consider it.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAdministrative Law JudgeTimelinessService of ProcessLabor Code Section 5903JurisdictionEAMSDefective Service
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Stabak v. ISS International

The case involves a claimant appealing three decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board. The claimant, a former maintenance worker, alleged an injury in November 1991, which he did not report, followed by his termination in December 1991. His initial workers' compensation claim was disallowed in March 1995 due to insufficient notice, and reconsideration was denied in June 1996. Separately, in October 1995, he filed a discrimination claim under Workers’ Compensation Law § 120, alleging retaliatory discharge, which was dismissed as untimely in November 1996. The court dismissed the appeal from the March 1995 decision as untimely filed. It affirmed the Board’s decisions from June 1996 and November 1996, concluding there was no abuse of discretion in denying reconsideration and that the discrimination claim was indeed untimely.

Workers' CompensationRetaliatory DischargeUntimely AppealTimely FilingNotice of InjuryAbuse of DiscretionDenial of ReconsiderationAppellate ReviewDiscriminatory PracticeEmployment Termination
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 926 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