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

In Re North Shore Hematology-Oncology Associates, P.C., Debtor

This memorandum opinion addresses whether the Debtor, a physician-owned healthcare practice, is a health care business under the Bankruptcy Code and if a patient care ombudsman should be appointed. The Court finds the Debtor is a healthcare business but waives the appointment of an ombudsman at this time. The decision is based on several factors, including the Debtor's lack of inpatient services, low patient complaint rate, existing compliance programs (HIPAA, CLIA), ability to maintain high-quality care, and monitoring by the New York State Department of Health. The Court notes the potential for revisiting the appointment if circumstances change.

BankruptcyPatient Care OmbudsmanHealthcare BusinessChapter 11Debtor in PossessionEastern District of New YorkSection 333(a)(1)Bankruptcy CodePatient ProtectionMedical Practice

References

Case No. ADJ7086267

Regular

Feb 14, 2013

Branden Robinson vs. Circulating Air, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns Branden Robinson's attempt to recover vocational expert fees through an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process. The Ombudsman found the reimbursement request improperly raised due to insufficient documentation and service. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed reconsideration, as no final determination was made, and denied removal. Applicant was advised to properly initiate proceedings with the Ombudsman by providing sufficient specificity regarding the claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBranden RobinsonCirculating AirSeabright Insurance CompanyOmbudsmanVocational ExpertReimbursementAlternative Dispute ResolutionSheet Metal Workers International AssociationLabor Management Safety Oversight Committee

References

Case No. 01-cv-7920 (AKH)

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 29, 2006

Hirt v. Equitable Retirement Plan for Employees

This Second Supplementary Decision and Order for Judgment addresses three key issues: the effective date of Equitable's cash balance plan, the applicable statute of limitations, and the implementation of prior rulings. The court established January 18, 1993, as the effective date for the cash balance plan. Crucially, it ruled that the named plaintiffs' class action, filed on August 23, 2001, was time-barred under New York's six-year statute of limitations, as their cause of action accrued on January 18, 1993. However, the decision clarified that class members not directly party to this lawsuit are not bound by this limitation and retain their right to pursue claims. Finally, the plaintiffs' request for an ombudsman role in judgment implementation was denied.

ERISACash Balance PlanStatute of LimitationsClass ActionEmployee BenefitsPension PlanNotice RequirementsDe-grandfatheringFederal Discovery RuleRepudiation

References

Showing 1-3 of 3 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

In Re North Shore Hematology-Oncology Associates, P.C., Debtor

BankruptcyPatient Care OmbudsmanHealthcare BusinessChapter 11Debtor in PossessionEastern District of New YorkSection 333(a)(1)Bankruptcy CodePatient ProtectionMedical Practice

Branden Robinson vs. Circulating Air, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

Hirt v. Equitable Retirement Plan for Employees

ERISACash Balance PlanStatute of LimitationsClass ActionEmployee BenefitsPension PlanNotice RequirementsDe-grandfatheringFederal Discovery RuleRepudiation