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
Jun 09, 2011

In re the Certification as Qualified Adoptive Parents Pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 115-d

This case concerns Joanna K. and Scottye K.'s application to waive the mandatory certification as qualified adoptive parents for Jeremiah B., the biological son of Careese B. The K.s received physical custody of Jeremiah shortly after his birth in March 2009, prior to obtaining the required judicial certification, thereby violating New York's adoption statute. The court reviewed the convoluted history, including Careese B.'s judicial consent to adoption and the K.s' temporary custody order. However, the court denied the waiver application, emphasizing the critical importance of pre-placement certification to protect children and prevent unregulated transfers of custody. The decision stated that the petitioners failed to show good cause for waiver and that a retroactive approval of non-compliance would undermine legislative intent, although the K.s retain legal and physical custody pending the adoption petition.

Adoption Law CompliancePrivate-Placement Adoption RequirementsPre-Placement CertificationWaiver Application DenialChild Welfare LegislationFamily Law ProcedureJudicial DiscretionStatutory InterpretationParental Fitness StandardsCustody Transfer
References
9
Case No. 13-20-00004-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2021

Regina Kay Smith and Jeffrey Scott Grove, as Surviving Parents of Brittany Dawn Grove v. USI Industrial Services, Inc.

Regina Kay Smith and Jeffrey Scott Grove, parents of Brittany Dawn Grove, appealed a summary judgment granted to USI Industrial Services, Inc. The Groves brought claims against USI based on respondeat superior and non-employee mission liability after a fatal auto accident involving USI's former employees, Roberto Rodriguez and Alejandro Ayala, and Brittany Grove. The accident occurred while Rodriguez and Ayala were traveling home after being terminated from USI. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that no genuine issue of material fact existed regarding Rodriguez's employment status with USI at the time of the accident. Additionally, the court found that USI did not control the manner or route of travel for the non-employees, thereby negating non-employee mission liability.

Respondeat SuperiorVicarious LiabilityNon-Employee Mission LiabilitySummary Judgment AppealEmployment TerminationCourse and Scope of EmploymentFatal Auto AccidentAffidavit EvidenceJudicial ReviewTexas Court of Appeals
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 1990

In re Mary S.

This is an appeal from an order terminating a father's parental rights to his daughter, Mary S., on the grounds of permanent neglect. The Family Court found the father failed to make diligent efforts to reunite with Mary, citing non-compliance with court-ordered therapy and housing requirements, despite maintaining contact and visitation. Mary S. had a history of neglect, initially placed in foster care in 1986, and was later found to be mildly retarded, eventually bonding with the foster parents who adopted her brother. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, rejecting claims of an unfair hearing and improper testimony, emphasizing that the Department of Social Services fulfilled its duty and termination was in Mary's best interest. The decision allowed Mary S. to be freed for adoption by her foster parents.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationChild NeglectFoster CareAdoptionFamily LawSocial ServicesAppellate DecisionChild WelfareDiligent Efforts
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 02, 2015

Matter of Alexsander N.

This case concerns an appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County. Petitioner initiated a permanent neglect proceeding against respondent, the mother of a child, which resulted in a suspended judgment due to respondent's failure to plan for the child's future and non-compliance with mental health treatment. Petitioner later filed a petition alleging respondent violated the suspended judgment by failing to disclose an arrest and subsequent incarceration, which led to missed appointments and visits. The Family Court revoked the suspended judgment and terminated respondent's parental rights. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding that respondent failed to comply with the terms of the suspended judgment and that the termination of parental rights was in the child's best interests.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectSuspended Judgment ViolationChild WelfareFamily Law AppealNon-compliance with Court OrderBest Interests of ChildMental Health IssuesChild SupervisionAppellate Affirmation
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Ryan V.

This case concerns an appeal from a Family Court order in Broome County which terminated a mother's parental rights. The Family Court had previously adjudicated the respondent's two children as permanently neglected due to sexual abuse by her husband and suspended judgment on conditions, including not allowing the husband near the children and becoming a protective ally. The petitioner later sought revocation, alleging the respondent violated the conditions by continuing her relationship with her husband and failing to protect her children. The Family Court found non-compliance and terminated parental rights. The Appellate Court affirmed, ruling that the petitioner met its burden of proof and that a separate dispositional hearing was not required after the violation finding.

Parental RightsPermanent NeglectSuspended JudgmentChild Sexual AbuseFamily CourtAppellate DivisionChild WelfareBroome CountySocial Services LawNon-compliance
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thomas v. Osborne

The case involves an appeal by the mother from a Family Court order granting the father's application to modify a prior custody order. Initially, the mother had sole custody, but after allegations of child abuse and non-compliance with an order of protection prohibiting contact with two individuals with concerning histories, the Family Court awarded joint legal custody to both parents, with the father having physical custody. Subsequently, both parents filed petitions, and the Family Court found the mother in violation of the order of protection and granted the father sole custody with supervised visitation for the mother. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the modification was in the child's best interest, citing the mother's persistent non-compliance and the child's improved well-being under the father's primary care.

Custody DisputeParental RightsChild WelfareFamily Court AppealOrder of Protection ViolationSupervised VisitationBest Interest of the ChildChild Abuse AllegationsModification of CustodyDomestic Violence History
References
20
Case No. 2008 NY Slip Op 31457(U)
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2008

Parente v. 277 Park Avenue LLC

Plaintiff Dennis Párente, an operating engineer, sustained injuries after falling from a ladder while investigating a malfunctioning booster fan in an office leased by defendant Chase. The original Supreme Court ruling denied Párente's partial summary judgment motion under Labor Law § 240 (1) and dismissed the complaint. This Appellate Division order modified that decision, finding that Párente's activity constituted repair, not routine maintenance, thus making Labor Law § 240 (1) applicable and imposing absolute liability. Consequently, Párente's motion for summary judgment on this claim was granted, and the defendants' cross-motion for dismissal was denied. Other claims under Labor Law §§ 241 (6), 200, and common-law negligence were properly dismissed, and triable issues of fact remain concerning a third-party indemnification action.

Ladder FallBooster Fan RepairLabor Law § 240(1)Absolute LiabilitySummary Judgment MotionWorkplace SafetyWorker InjuryEmergency RepairThird-Party ActionIndemnification Claim
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Male D.

The court addressed a motion by petitioning adoptive parents to dispense with the appearance of the child’s natural parents in a private-placement adoption proceeding. The motion was denied due to concerns regarding whether the natural parents' extrajudicial consents were knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily given. The court highlighted the absence of independent legal advice for the natural parents and the conflict of interest with the adoptive parents' attorney acknowledging consents. Furthermore, the court found non-compliance with the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children, as the child was brought from Connecticut to New York without proper approval. The petitioners were directed to obtain the natural parents' testimony and to seek Compact approval forthwith.

Private AdoptionParental ConsentDue ProcessInterstate CompactAdoption LawNew York LawConnecticut ResidentsLegal RepresentationConflict of InterestJudicial Review
References
15
Case No. 03-22-00126-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2024

Greg Abbott in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Texas, Stephanie Muth in Her Official Capacity of Commissioner of the Department of Family and Protective Services, and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services v. Jane Doe, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Mary Doe, a Minor John Doe, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Mary Doe, a Minor And Dr. Megan Mooney

This case involves an appeal concerning a temporary injunction against the State of Texas for issuing a directive that classifies gender-affirming medical care for minors as child abuse. Appellees, including parents of a transgender adolescent and a psychologist, sued to enjoin the State from initiating child abuse investigations based on this directive. The trial court denied the State's plea to the jurisdiction and granted a temporary injunction. The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of jurisdiction and the injunction against the Department of Family and Protective Services and its Commissioner, concluding that the directive constituted an invalid rule under the APA and caused irreparable harm. However, it reversed the denial of jurisdiction and dismissed claims against the Governor, stating he lacked authority to control investigatory decisions.

Gender-affirming careChild abuse policyTemporary injunctionAdministrative Procedure ActUltra viresParental rightsEqual protectionDue processState government authorityJudicial review
References
62
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Ronald M.

The Erie County Department of Social Services (DSS) obtained temporary custody of Ronald M., Jr. based on a neglect petition alleging the mother's mental illness and substance abuse, and a prior neglect adjudication for an older sibling. At trial, the evidence from a child protective worker, a psychiatrist, and a nurse was deemed insufficient to prove current neglect. The Family Court granted the respondents' motions to dismiss. On appeal, DSS solely relied on the principle that prior neglect of one child is admissible to prove neglect of another, but the appellate court found this insufficient to sustain a neglect finding given the 16-month gap since the prior order and a lack of proof of non-compliance or new concerning behavior by the parents. The order dismissing the neglect petition was unanimously affirmed.

Child NeglectFamily LawAppellate CourtSufficiency of EvidencePrior AdjudicationParental FitnessChild Protective ServicesDomestic ViolenceMental Health IssuesSubstance Abuse History
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 5,092 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