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. 2025 NY Slip Op 00502 [234 AD3d 1215]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2025

Matter of Ito (International Business Promotion, Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)

Eriko Ito filed for unemployment insurance benefits after her employment with NHK Cosmomedia America, Inc. was terminated. The Department of Labor initially determined that International Business Promotion, Inc. (IBP), a recruiting and marketing company that placed Ito with NHK, was her employer and liable for unemployment insurance contributions. Although an Administrative Law Judge later ruled NHK was the true employer, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed this, finding IBP to be Ito's employer. IBP appealed the Board's decision. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's ruling, concluding that IBP exercised sufficient control over Ito's work, including screening, hiring, setting pay rates, direct payment, and handling complaints, to establish an employment relationship.

Unemployment InsuranceEmployment RelationshipIndependent ContractorStaffing AgencyRecruiting BusinessControl TestAppellate ReviewUnemployment Insurance Appeal BoardLabor LawJudiciary Law
References
11
Case No. 13-09-00067-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 2013

CITY OF McALLEN, TEXAS v. Arnaldo Ramirez Jr., Raul Romero, Promotions of America, Inc., Nolana Entertainment, Inc.

The City of McAllen appealed a trial court judgment that found its denial of a conditional use permit for the Collage nightclub constituted an unconstitutional taking under the Texas Constitution. Appellees Arnaldo Ramirez Jr., Raul Romero, Promotions of America, Inc., and Nolana Entertainment, Inc., had sued after the permit denial led to the nightclub's closure and significant financial losses. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that the City's actions demonstrated a severe economic impact and interfered with the appellees' reasonable investment-backed expectations, thus satisfying the criteria for a regulatory taking. The court also upheld the awards for lost investments, lost profits, and the loss of collateralized property (La Villa Real) and its associated rental income.

Regulatory TakingProperty RightsConditional Use PermitZoning OrdinanceTexas Constitution Article I Section 17Economic ImpactInvestment-Backed ExpectationsDue ProcessDamages AwardLost Profits
References
93
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cephalon, Inc. v. Travelers Companies, Inc.

Plaintiff Cephalon, Inc. initiated a declaratory judgment action against The Travelers Companies, Inc. and its four subsidiaries in the Southern District of New York. Cephalon sought a declaration that its off-label promotion of the drug Actiq did not violate the FDCA and caused no injury to Travelers. This suit was filed after Travelers, a workers' compensation insurer, sent pre-suit settlement demands to Cephalon, accusing it of causing damages through off-label drug promotion. Travelers moved to dismiss or transfer the case. The court granted Travelers' motion to dismiss, ruling that Cephalon's declaratory action was improperly anticipatory, having been filed in direct response to Travelers' specific threat of litigation and impending deadlines.

Declaratory JudgmentImproperly AnticipatoryFirst-Filed RuleMotion to DismissFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)Off-Label Drug PromotionFood, Drug and Cosmetics ActInsurance DisputeWorkers' CompensationForum Selection
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carlisle v. Philip Morris, Inc.

This appeal addresses whether the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act preempts state common-law tort claims for smoking-related injuries and deaths. Plaintiffs, including individual smokers and widows of deceased smokers, alleged various tort claims like failure to warn, design defects, misrepresentation, and civil conspiracy against cigarette manufacturers. The trial court initially granted summary judgment for the defendants based on preemption. The appellate court reversed, concluding that the Labeling Act does not clearly or unambiguously intend to preempt such common-law claims. The court highlighted the speculative nature of the conflict, the Act's primary goal of public health information, the lack of alternative remedies, and legislative history.

PreemptionFederal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising ActCommon-Law TortSmoking InjuriesProduct LiabilityFailure to WarnDesign DefectsMisrepresentationCivil ConspiracyState Law
References
83
Case No. 2015-06-0150
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 16, 2015

Hale, Sherry v. Prime Package & Label, LLC

Employee Sherry Hale, with a pre-existing shoulder condition, alleged a work-related re-injury in October 2014 while working for Prime Package & Label, LLC. She sought medical care and underwent surgery by Dr. Charles Kaelin, but the employer denied the claim, citing insufficient proof of causation. The trial court found sufficient proof of injury but ordered the employer to authorize a causation evaluation by Dr. Kaelin, while denying immediate additional medical and temporary disability benefits. Hale appealed the denial of benefits. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's denial of additional medical and temporary disability benefits and remanded the case for further proceedings, noting the lack of a complete record on appeal for the evidentiary review.

Workers' CompensationShoulder InjuryPre-existing ConditionCausationMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityInterlocutory AppealAppeals BoardEmployer LiabilityMedical Evaluation
References
9
Case No. 2015-06-0150
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 25, 2015

Hale, Sherry v. Prime Packaging & Label, LLC

Sherry Hale, the employee, filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking medical and temporary disability benefits for a right shoulder rotator cuff tear. The employer, Prime Package & Label, LLC, disputed the claim, citing pre-existing conditions and the employee's inability to precisely describe the injury's occurrence. The Court found that Ms. Hale established prima facie proof of an injury but lacked sufficient medical causation evidence at this stage. Consequently, the employer was ordered to authorize Dr. Kaelin to provide an opinion on medical causation to a reasonable degree of medical certainty. Other requests for benefits were denied as premature, and the case was set for an Initial Hearing. The Court also noted a potential violation of claims handling standards by the employer for a belated denial of benefits.

Expedited HearingMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityCausationRotator Cuff TearPre-existing InjuryNotice of InjuryPanel of PhysiciansClaims Handling StandardsEmployer Liability
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2002

Sterling Promotional Corp. v. General Accident Insurance Co. of New York

The plaintiff, Sterling Promotional Corporation, filed a declaratory judgment action against Travelers Property Casualty Company concerning insurance coverage for damaged teddy bears. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and for attorneys' fees, alleging the plaintiff's president, Steven Linder, repeatedly and deliberately evaded discovery depositions over two years. The court found a 'very devious, continuous effort' by the plaintiff to avoid depositions, constituting bad faith and intransigence. Consequently, the court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint and awarded $2,550 in attorneys' fees, assessed jointly and severally against Sterling and its attorney, Golub. Additionally, the action against co-defendant SGS Testing was dismissed due to a lack of federal jurisdiction following Travelers' dismissal.

Discovery SanctionsMotion to DismissFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 37Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41bAttorneys' FeesBad Faith ConductEvasion of DiscoveryDeposition MisconductLack of Federal JurisdictionDeclaratory Judgment
References
7
Case No. ADJ6697300
Regular
Aug 31, 2015

Lorenzo Yanez vs. Universal Label Printers, Sparta Insurance Company, Employers Compensation Insurance Company

This case involves an insurance dispute over contribution liability for a workers' compensation claim. The applicant, Lorenzo Yanez, sustained an injury while employed by Universal Label Printers, with coverage from Sparta Insurance Company and Employers Compensation Insurance Company. A Compromise and Release (C&R) agreement was approved, which included an addendum purportedly allocating liability between Sparta (17%) and Employers (87%). Sparta sought to enforce this addendum for reimbursement, but the trial judge denied their petition, finding a lack of jurisdiction due to no separate petition for contribution being filed within the statutory one-year period. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding continuing jurisdiction to enforce the C&R and its addendum under Labor Code section 5803, and returned the matter to the trial judge to determine the enforceability and terms of the addendum.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition for ContributionLabor Code Section 5500.5Continuing JurisdictionLabor Code Section 5803Apportionment of Liability
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cardoza v. Healthfirst, Inc.

Plaintiff Paula Cardozo sued Health-first, Inc. under Title VII and New York Human Rights Laws, alleging gender discrimination for being denied a promotion and subsequently terminated. She claimed a less qualified man was promoted over her and that her termination was gender-based. Defendant Healthfirst moved for summary judgment, arguing legitimate non-discriminatory business reasons for its actions, including the promoted individual's strong performance and a shift in business emphasis leading to the plaintiff's position becoming less significant. The court, presided over by Judge Berman, granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for the failure to promote claim and did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the defendant's stated reasons were a pretext for discrimination regarding either the promotion or the termination. Consequently, the federal claims were dismissed, and the court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.

Gender DiscriminationTitle VIISummary JudgmentEmployment LawFailure to PromoteWrongful TerminationNew York Human Rights LawPrima Facie CasePretextDisparate Treatment
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. C.R. Bard, Inc.

Plaintiff Michael Smith sued C.R. Bard, Inc. alleging retaliatory discharge under various acts, including the False Claims Act and Tennessee Public Protection Act. Smith claimed he was terminated for reporting the defendant's alleged off-label promotion of Tegress for male incontinence. The Court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiff's, finding Smith's complaints were motivated by personal liability concerns, not public good, and he failed to establish causation for his termination. The plaintiff's Tennessee False Claims Act claim was also deemed abandoned due to lack of pleading.

Retaliatory DischargeFalse Claims ActWhistleblower ProtectionSummary JudgmentEmployment LawOff-label PromotionMedical DevicesTennessee Public Protection ActCausationPublic Policy Exception
References
52
Showing 1-10 of 460 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