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. ADJ9022023
Regular
Jul 14, 2014

Katherine Ann Burton vs. MOTEL 6, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration to amend an award. The original award found temporary total disability from July 22, 2013, to November 6, 2013, but only awarded indemnity benefits through October 4, 2013. The Board, adopting the WCJ's recommendation, amended the award to reflect temporary total disability specifically from July 22, 2013, to October 4, 2013. The issue of benefits after October 4, 2013, was deferred.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and Ordertemporary total disabilitytemporary disability indemnityworkers' compensation appeals boardWCJLiberty Mutual InsuranceMotel 6Report and Recommendationamended
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Bodin Apparel, Inc.

Bodin Apparel, Inc. (Bodin) appealed a bankruptcy court order that granted priority status to a claim by the ILGWU Southeast Region Health and Welfare Fund (the Fund) for unpaid employee benefit contributions. The bankruptcy court had found that Bodin ceased its principal business operations by October 31, 1980, entitling the Fund's claim for contributions from the preceding 180 days to priority under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(4). Bodin contended that its post-October 1980 reorganization and liquidation activities constituted 'doing business,' which would shift the priority measurement date to its November 23, 1981 Chapter 11 filing, thereby eliminating the Fund's priority claim. The district court, under Judge Robert J. Ward, conducted a de novo review of the legal interpretation of 'cessation of business' within § 507(a)(4) and affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision, concluding that Bodin had indeed ceased its principal business by October 31, 1980, thus upholding the priority of the Fund's $32,964.98 claim.

Bankruptcy LawEmployee Benefit ClaimsPriority StatusCessation of BusinessStatutory InterpretationChapter 11 ReorganizationUnpaid ContributionsAppellate ReviewBankruptcy Code Section 507(a)(4)Labor Union Fund
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 02, 2001

Claim of Medina v. Building Maintenance Service

Claimant sustained work-related injuries in July 1999. Her physician, Dr. Magdy Elamir, failed to file medical reports with the Workers' Compensation Board after August 1999 and before April 18, 2001, and with the State Insurance Fund until April 18, 2001. This led to a controversy over insurance coverage between Fireman’s Fund and State Fund. Initially, a WCLJ awarded benefits, but the Board rescinded the award for October 4, 1999, to April 18, 2001, citing prejudice to State Fund. On appeal, the court determined that State Fund was not prejudiced from October 4, 1999, to December 21, 2000, and reversed that part of the Board's decision, while affirming the denial of benefits from December 21, 2000, to April 18, 2001.

Workers' CompensationMedical Report FilingPrejudiceInsurance Coverage DisputeDenial of BenefitsAppellate ReviewAdministrative DeterminationSubstantial EvidenceRegulatory ComplianceNeurologist
References
7
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 02305 [216 AD3d 630]
Regular Panel Decision
May 03, 2023

Lochan v. H & H Sons Home Improvement, Inc.

Ashram Lochan sued H & H Sons Home Improvement, Inc., 82 S 4 Associate Limited Liability Company, and Hassan Haghanegi for personal injuries sustained from falling off an unsecured ladder while painting, alleging Labor Law violations. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on liability against 82 S 4 Associate Limited Liability Company and, in effect, searched the record to award summary judgment against Hassan Haghanegi, denying the defendants' cross-motion to dismiss. The Appellate Division modified the order by deleting the award of summary judgment against Hassan Haghanegi, finding it improperly searched the record. However, it affirmed the grant of summary judgment against 82 S 4 Associate Limited Liability Company, concluding the plaintiff established a prima facie case and defendants failed to raise a triable issue. The court also affirmed the denial of the defendants' cross-motion, ruling they failed to establish the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause, a recalcitrant worker, or a volunteer.

Ladder AccidentPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewLabor Law § 240(1)Sole Proximate CauseRecalcitrant Worker DefenseUnsecured LadderConstruction Site SafetyWorker Fall
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Access 4 All, Inc. v. Trump International Hotel & Tower Condominium

Plaintiffs Access 4 Al, Inc., a non-profit representing disabled persons, and Peter Spalluto, a quadriplegic using a wheelchair, sued Trump International Hotel and Tower Condominium under Title III of the ADA. They sought a declaratory judgment and an injunction for ADA-mandated alterations, alleging discrimination due to inaccessible facilities during Spalluto's 2004 stay. Defendant moved to dismiss or for summary judgment. The Court found Spalluto demonstrated a plausible intention to return to Trump Tower, establishing his standing. However, the Court dismissed Access 4 Al's claims, finding them identical to Spalluto's and citing prudential limitations on associational standing, while denying the defendant's motion against Spalluto.

Americans with Disabilities ActADAStandingInjunctive ReliefSummary JudgmentMotion to DismissAccessibility GuidelinesADAAGQuadriplegiaWheelchair User
References
53
Case No. ADJ7741121
Regular
Dec 02, 2011

ROBIN COUTO vs. NBC UNIVERSAL, ELECTRIC INSURANCE COMPANY

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision, reconsideration was granted on the applicant's petition. The Board affirmed the original decision of October 4, 2011, with one amendment. Specifically, the date of injury in Finding of Fact No. 1 was corrected to "August 4, 2009." This amendment was made based on the WCJ's report, which the Board adopted and incorporated.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationWCJ DecisionDate of InjuryAmended Finding of FactNBC UniversalElectric Insurance Company
References
0
Case No. ADJ383172 (STK 0200826)
Regular
Nov 17, 2010

ENRIQUE CASTANEDA vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration because it was filed one day late. The defendant argued the administrative law judge erred in applying the Almaraz/Guzman II standards to calculate the applicant's permanent disability. However, the Board found the petition was untimely and therefore must be dismissed, noting it would have been denied on the merits otherwise. The deadline for filing was October 4, 2010, and the petition was received on October 5, 2010.

Almaraz/Guzman IIAMA GuidesPermanent DisabilityFindings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationTimelinessJurisdictional Time LimitWCJ ReportWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code Section 5903
References
9
Case No. CV-24-0652
Regular Panel Decision
May 29, 2025

Matter of Cahill v. New York State Dept. of Mental Hygiene

Claimant Lynn Cahill sustained a work-related knee injury in 1992, which led to a total knee replacement in 2012 and subsequent revision surgeries. In October 2020, she was diagnosed with a periprosthetic infection, managed with antibiotics. Her condition acutely worsened in September 2022, leading her orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Frank Lombardo, to recommend and perform immediate cement spacer surgery on October 4, 2022, due to risks of sepsis and amputation. The employer and carrier disputed liability, arguing the surgery lacked prior authorization. However, the Workers' Compensation Board, affirmed by the Appellate Division, Third Department, ruled that the surgery was performed on an emergency basis, thereby waiving the authorization requirement under Workers' Compensation Law § 13-a (5) and holding the carrier responsible for the costs.

Knee InjuryPeriprosthetic InfectionEmergency Medical CareSurgical AuthorizationAppellate DivisionWorkers' Compensation Board ReviewMedical NecessityChronic InfectionSepsisAmputation Risk
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'DONNELL v. First Investors Corp.

Plaintiff James R. O'Donnell, Jr. sued defendants First Investors Corporation (FIC) and Howard Froman concerning his employment contract. Defendants moved to compel arbitration, arguing the dispute falls under National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD) rules, while O'Donnell contended pre-October 1993 NASD rules did not cover employment contracts and that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) superseded his initial employment agreement. The Court found the U-4 form, which included an arbitration clause, remained valid. It sided with the Eleventh Circuit's interpretation that pre-October 1993 NASD rules encompassed employment disputes, aligning with federal policy favoring arbitration. The motion to compel arbitration was granted, and the action was stayed, but the defendants' request for costs against the plaintiff was denied as O'Donnell's arguments were not deemed unreasonable given the split in judicial opinion.

Arbitration AgreementEmployment DisputeNASD RulesU-4 FormFederal Arbitration ActSecurities IndustryRegistered RepresentativeContract InterpretationJudicial PrecedentCircuit Split
References
18
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 00835 [224 AD3d 1059]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2024

Matter of McNulty v. Craeco, Inc.

Claimant James McNulty sustained a compensable back injury in October 2017 and was awarded workers' compensation benefits. His benefits were initially suspended due to lack of medical evidence but later reinstated. In October 2020, McNulty pleaded guilty to various crimes, including criminal sale of a firearm, and was incarcerated, leading to a suspension of his benefits under Workers' Compensation Law § 10 (4). The employer's workers' compensation carrier raised an issue of a Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a violation, contending that McNulty's criminal activities constituted unreported work. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge held the determination on the § 114-a violation in abeyance pending McNulty's release from prison, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board upon administrative review. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding no error in holding the determination in abeyance to provide McNulty an ample opportunity to address the issue of whether he knowingly misrepresented material facts for purposes of obtaining benefits, as collateral estoppel did not apply.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsFraud AllegationCollateral EstoppelDue ProcessIncarcerationFalse StatementMaterial FactAppellate ReviewAbeyanceCriminal Conviction
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 1,458 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