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. 2021 NY Slip Op 01050 [191 AD3d 884]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 17, 2021

Matter of Faith A. M. (Faith M.)

The mother, Faith M., appealed an order from the Family Court, Kings County, which found her to have derivatively neglected her child, Faith A.M. This finding stemmed from a prior neglect determination in May 2014 concerning her other children due to excessive corporal punishment, which the court deemed proximate in time to the current proceeding. The evidence presented, including statements from siblings, testimony from a school counselor, and observations of injuries, corroborated the ongoing use of excessive corporal punishment. The Family Court's assessment of the mother's credibility, finding her denials incredible, was supported by the record, reinforced by her guilty plea to disorderly conduct related to similar allegations. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's order, as the mother failed to provide evidence that the circumstances leading to the neglect finding no longer existed.

Child NeglectDerivative NeglectCorporal PunishmentFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewParental JudgmentPreponderance of EvidenceCredibilityPrior FindingsRisk of Harm
References
11
Case No. ADJ991157 (GRO 0032393)
Regular
Jun 07, 2010

RANDY SHOOK (Deceased) GLENDA STAFFORD vs. ARMORED TRANSPORT, ESIS SOUTHFIELD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration in the case of Randy Shook's suicide. Applicant argued the employer's investigation was conducted in bad faith, thus invalidating the "good faith personnel action" defense. However, the Board found the investigation met the objective reasonableness standard and was undertaken in subjective good faith. The Board distinguished this case from those involving criminal false imprisonment and affirmed its authority to reject a WCJ's findings when substantial evidence supports its own. Therefore, compensation remains barred under Labor Code section 3208.3(h).

Labor Code section 3208.3(h)good faith personnel actionindustrial suicidepsychiatric injurydeceit and coercionpreliminary investigationcriminal misconductsubjective good faithobjective reasonablenesscriminal false imprisonment
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 1945

Empire Case Goods Workers Union v. Empire Case Goods Co.

Empire Case Goods Workers Union, on behalf of its members, brought an action against Empire Case Goods Company and Sidney G. Bose to recover vacation pay stipulated in a contract. Empire sold its business to Bose, leading both defendants to deny liability for the vacation pay. The Special Term initially dismissed the complaint against both defendants, reasoning that Empire's employees became Bose's and Bose was not party to the contract. On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal against Bose, finding no implied assumption of Empire's wage structure. However, it reversed the dismissal against Empire, holding Empire liable for the vacation pay as employees were not notified of the change in employer and continued to work under Empire's apparent authority, making Empire responsible under master and servant law.

Vacation PayEmployer LiabilitySuccessor LiabilityEmployment ContractSale of BusinessNotice of TerminationAgency RelationshipMaster and Servant LawAppellate ReviewWage Dispute
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Bush Industries, Inc.

This case involves a Chapter 11 reorganization plan for Bush Industries, Inc., a furniture manufacturer. The Official Committee of Equity Security Holders objected to the plan, arguing it violated the absolute priority rule, proposed improper general releases, and lacked good faith due to a "golden parachute" for the principal officer, Paul S. Bush. Bankruptcy Judge Carl L. Bucki determined that the debtor's enterprise value did not exceed outstanding claims, thus upholding the absolute priority rule regarding pre-petition stock cancellation. However, the court found that the renegotiated employment contract for Paul Bush and the proposed releases for corporate management constituted a breach of fiduciary duty by officers and directors, violating the good faith requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(3). Consequently, the court denied confirmation of the plan in its present form, requiring the debtor to demonstrate good faith in a revised plan, possibly by distributing the premium secured by management to all shareholders.

Chapter 11 BankruptcyPlan of ReorganizationAbsolute Priority RuleFiduciary DutyCorporate GovernanceGolden ParachuteValuation MethodologiesDiscounted Cash Flow AnalysisComparable Companies AnalysisExit Multiple
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 10, 2014

Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.

This Opinion & Order addresses a class and collective action filed by plaintiff Maxcimo Scott against Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Minimum Wage Act due to the misclassification of "apprentices" as exempt from overtime pay. Chipotle asserted statutory good faith defenses under 29 U.S.C. §§ 259 and 260 but sought a protective order to prevent discovery of attorney-client communications, claiming it did not rely on legal advice. The court, presided over by U.S. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn, ruled that Chipotle's invocation of good faith defenses implicitly waived attorney-client privilege, as the advice of counsel was central to evaluating the sincerity of these defenses. Consequently, the court denied Chipotle's motion for a protective order, compelling the production of relevant privileged documents. Additionally, the decision permits discovery into Chipotle's differing classification of apprentices in California, deeming it relevant to the issue of willfulness and good faith in other states.

Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)New York Minimum Wage Act (NYLL)Overtime CompensationWage and Hour DisputesClass Action LawsuitAttorney-Client PrivilegeAt-Issue WaiverGood Faith DefenseProtective Order MotionEmployment Misclassification
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 2005

Plaza Restoration, Inc. v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

The plaintiff insured brought an action seeking a declaratory judgment, alleging that the defendant insurer breached its covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This alleged breach related to a personal injury action previously commenced against the plaintiff by a construction worker. The defendant appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, which had denied its motion to dismiss the complaint or for summary judgment, arguing the action was premature. The appellate court rejected the defendant's contention, affirming that a declaratory judgment action against an insurer is permissible even before a judgment in the underlying action. The order of the Supreme Court was affirmed, with costs.

Declaratory JudgmentBreach of CovenantGood Faith and Fair DealingInsurance LawPersonal InjuryConstruction Site InjuryRipeness DoctrineMotion to DismissSummary JudgmentAppellate Review
References
3
Case No. ADJ10679452
Regular
Jun 29, 2018

HORTENCIA AGUILAR vs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, EMPLOYMENT & HUMAN SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it failed to meet the procedural requirements of Labor Code section 5902 and WCAB Rule 10842 by not providing specific references to the record. The Board adopted the Judge's report and recommendation, which found that the employer's disciplinary action against the applicant was not taken in good faith. Specifically, the employer failed to follow its own investigatory procedures by not including the applicant's input and by not adhering to its dispute resolution process. The Judge concluded that the employer's actions lacked the objective reasonableness required for a good-faith personnel action under applicable case law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5902WCAB Rule 10842Report and RecommendationInjury to psycheGood faith personnel actionObjective good faith standardCotran v. Rollins Hudig Hall Intl.Inc.
References
0
Case No. ADJ13303390
Regular
Feb 15, 2023

JULIO PINEDA vs. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to review the administrative law judge's (WCJ) finding of a compensable psychiatric injury. The defendant argued the psychiatric Qualified Medical Examiner's (QME) opinion lacked substantial evidence and that a "good faith personnel action" defense applied. The WCAB rescinded the award, finding the WCJ's decision failed to include a detailed analysis of the "good faith personnel action" defense as required by *Rolda v. Pitney Bowes*. The matter is returned to the WCJ to issue a new decision addressing all relevant issues under the preponderance of evidence standard.

Psychiatric injuryGood faith personnel action defenseRolda analysisSubstantial causePredominant causeQualified Medical Examiner (QME)Findings and Award (F&A)RescindReturn to WCJLabor Code section 3208.3
References
2
Case No. ADJ10434987
Regular
Jan 06, 2023

EZRA CENTENO vs. HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS, SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION, CORVEL CORPORATION

This case involves an applicant claiming psychological injury, neck pain, headaches, and sleep disorder due to events at Harbor Freight Tools. The defendant argues the injury was substantially caused by lawful, non-discriminatory, good faith personnel actions, which would bar compensation under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award, finding the trial judge used too narrow a standard for "good faith personnel actions" and did not adequately analyze them under the required multi-level approach. The case is returned for further proceedings to properly develop the medical record and reassess the personnel action defense.

Psychiatric injuryGood faith personnel actionLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Substantial causePredominant causeTemporomandibular joint disorderAOE/COEWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings and AwardReconsideration
References
6
Case No. ADJ12294911
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

KHADIJAH BROWN vs. REGINALD AJAKWE, MD, RAYMOND TATEVOSSIAN, MD, MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Khadijah Brown sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that she did not sustain a psychiatric injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) and that a good faith personnel action defense was established. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the WCJ erroneously concluded applicant did not sustain injury to her psyche AOE/COE and failed to recognize objective evidence of harassment. The Board rescinded the original findings and substituted new findings, determining that applicant did sustain injury to her psyche AOE/COE and that this injury resulted from actual events of employment. The issue of the defendant's good faith personnel action defense was deferred for further proceedings.

AOE/COEpsychiatric injuryLabor Code Section 3208.3(b)(1)actual events of employmentharassmentgood faith personnel actionVerga v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.racial epithetsuspensiontermination
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 3,933 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