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

Claim of Eddy v. Rochester-Genesee Regional Transportation Authority

Two employees of the Regional Transit Service sustained injuries in July 1994 while playing on an employer-sponsored softball team. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled that these injuries were causally related to their employment, leading the employer to appeal the decisions. The court evaluated whether the employer "sponsored" the team through overt encouragement and control, as stipulated by Workers' Compensation Law § 10 (1). Evidence presented, including employer-funded uniforms with logos, promotional materials displayed at the workplace, and significant managerial control over the Sunshine Fund which financed the team, supported the finding of sufficient employer sponsorship. Consequently, the court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the injuries arose out of and in the course of employment and entitled the claimants to workers' compensation benefits.

Workers' CompensationEmployment InjuriesOff-duty Athletic EventEmployer SponsorshipEmployee MoraleSoftball TeamCausally Related DisabilitiesAppellate ReviewWorkers’ Compensation BoardScope of Employment
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Scally v. Regional Industrial Partnership

Joseph E. Scally sustained personal injuries after falling from an air conditioning unit while working on a project involving the removal and replacement of these units from a building's roof. Plaintiffs brought an action alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6) against various parties involved in the project, including Regional Industrial Partnership, ABB Automation, Inc., Webster Crane Service, Inc., and Hendon Enterprises, Inc. The Supreme Court initially denied partial summary judgment for plaintiffs on Labor Law § 240 (1) and dismissed certain Labor Law claims against the defendants. On appeal, the order was modified to reinstate Labor Law § 240 (1) claims against Regional Industrial Partnership, ABB Automation, Inc., and Webster Crane Service, Inc., granting plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on this claim. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim and other parts of the order, while also addressing indemnification claims between the defendants and third-party defendant Ancoma, Inc., Scally's employer.

Personal InjuryLabor LawSummary JudgmentElevation Related RiskProximate CauseContributory NegligenceIndemnificationThird-Party ActionCrane AccidentConstruction Accident
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ley v. Rochester Regional Joint Board, Local 14A

Rhonda P. Ley, Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board, filed a petition against the Rochester Regional Joint Board, Local 14A (Union) seeking a preliminary injunction. Ley alleged that Article XXII of the collective bargaining agreement between the Union and Xerox Corporation (Employer) constituted an unlawful 'union signatory' agreement under Section 8(e) of the National Labor Relations Act. Furthermore, Ley claimed that the Union's continued attempts to enforce Article XXII violated Sections 8(b)(4)(ii)(A) and (B) of the Act. The Union argued that Article XXII was a lawful work preservation provision. The Court found reasonable cause to believe the Union was violating the Act and that a preliminary injunction was just and proper to prevent further statutory violations and maintain public interest. Consequently, the preliminary injunction was granted, enjoining the Union from enforcing Article XXII.

Labor LawPreliminary InjunctionUnfair Labor PracticeNational Labor Relations ActUnion Signatory AgreementWork PreservationCollective Bargaining AgreementSubcontractingArbitrationDistrict Court
References
11
Case No. 527925
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 25, 2019

Matter of Smith v. Rochester-Genesee Regional Transp. Auth.

Claimant George I. Smith appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision from November 15, 2017. The Board ruled that Smith's lower back injury was not a consequential causally-related injury to his initial work-related right foot and consequential left knee injuries from February 2012. Additionally, the Board found that Smith violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a by failing to disclose his complete medical history regarding a prior lower back injury from a 2000 motor vehicle accident. The WCLJ and subsequently the Board denied Smith's request to amend his claim for the lower back injury and imposed penalties, rescinding and disqualifying him from future indemnity benefits. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported both the lack of causal relationship for the back injury and the § 114-a violation due to Smith's false representations and omissions.

Workers' Compensation Law § 114-aFraudulent MisrepresentationCausally Related InjuryLower Back InjuryIndependent Medical ExaminationPrior Medical HistoryIndemnity BenefitsAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceCredibility Determination
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Region v. W. J. Woodward Construction, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal regarding the electrocution death of a construction worker and the application of Labor Law § 240. The decedent, Grover J. Region, an ironworker employed by McBrearity's Metal Building Erectors, was fatally injured on November 18, 1982, when a crane cable he was helping to operate came into contact with high tension electric lines at a construction site in Ulster County. The plaintiff, administratrix of the decedent's estate, filed a lawsuit against property owner William J. Woodward and contractor W. J. Woodward Construction, Inc., among others, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) due to the failure to provide proper safety measures for crane operation near electrical hazards. The Supreme Court granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability against Woodward and Woodward Construction, who subsequently appealed this decision. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding that the defendants had violated Labor Law § 240 (1) by failing to implement necessary safety precautions for the crane, which was being used as a hoist, thereby incurring absolute liability for the injuries proximately caused.

ElectrocutionConstruction AccidentCrane OperationLabor Law § 240Absolute LiabilityWorker SafetySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewContractor LiabilityOwner Liability
References
9
Case No. ADJ12182074
Regular
Jan 30, 2023

JUSTIN HAMILTON vs. SACRAMENTO REGIONAL TRANSIT

The Appeals Board rescinded a WCJ's take-nothing order and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board found that the Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME), Dr. Campbell, needs to supplement his opinion on industrial injury causation given the WCJ's credibility finding against the applicant. Additionally, the WCJ must consider the applicant's alleged criminal conviction for workers' compensation fraud, if proven, and provide the AME with any conviction details for review. The Board emphasized that it expresses no final opinion on the injury's existence or compensability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryAgreed Medical EvaluatorCriminal ConvictionWorkers' Compensation FraudMedical OpinionCredibilityDiscoveryRescinded
References
3
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 06670 [165 AD3d 1631]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 05, 2018

Parkhurst v. Syracuse Regional Airport Auth.

This Labor Law and common-law negligence action stems from injuries sustained by Michael W. Parkhurst who slipped on plastic sheeting. Plaintiff appealed an order granting summary judgment to defendants City of Syracuse and Hueber-Breuer Construction Co., Inc. The Appellate Division reversed the lower court's order, reinstating the Labor Law § 200 claim and common-law negligence cause of action against the defendants. The court determined that defendants, as parties seeking summary judgment, failed to establish they did not exercise supervisory control over the work site or that they lacked actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. The court also rejected the contention that the injuries resulted from the decedent's methods of work or that the plastic sheeting was an open and obvious hazard inherent in the work.

Labor Law § 200 claimCommon-law negligenceSummary judgment appealWorkplace dangerous conditionPremises liabilityAppellate Division Fourth DepartmentSupervisory controlActual noticeConstructive noticeOwner liability
References
4
Case No. ADJ8477626, ADJ8576326
Regular
Nov 14, 2014

Susan Freed vs. Sharp Healthcare, Ace USA Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the original award. While affirming the original findings on industrial injury to the neck and right shoulder, the Board corrected a typographical error in the applicant's date of birth and increased the reimbursement for self-procured medical expenses from $352.41 to $510.18. The applicant's contentions regarding injury to the pectoral region and the temporary disability indemnity rate were otherwise denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOccupational TherapistIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryRight Shoulder InjuryPectoral Region InjuryTemporary Disability Indemnity RateSelf-Procured Medical ExpensesMedical Provider NetworkPetition for Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2004

Claim of Scally v. Ravena Coeymans Selkirk Central School District

In this case, a claimant appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding apportionment of her workers' compensation award. The claimant, who suffered a work-related left knee injury in 2002, had a pre-existing non-work-related injury to the same knee from 1986. While a WCLJ initially denied apportionment, the Board reversed, directing a 50/50 apportionment based on the premise that the prior injury would have resulted in a schedule loss of use award had it been work-related. The appellate court upheld the Board's determination, deferring to its interpretation that a non-work-related injury leading to a schedule loss of use constitutes a "disability in a compensation sense" for apportionment purposes. This decision was supported by medical expert testimony indicating a schedule loss of use from the prior surgery.

Workers' CompensationApportionmentKnee InjuryNon-work-related InjurySchedule Loss of UsePreexisting ConditionMedical Expert TestimonyBoard InterpretationJudicial ReviewAppellate Decision
References
13
Case No. ADJ10461936
Regular
Oct 20, 2020

Gary Ross vs. California Highway Patrol, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to amend a prior award for Gary Ross. The WCAB found that Labor Code section 4664(c)(1) limits the total permanent disability awarded for injuries to the "head, face, cardiovascular system, respiratory system, and all other systems or regions of the body" to 100% over an employee's lifetime. Since Mr. Ross had previously received awards totaling 59% permanent disability for injuries to this region, his award for the current cumulative trauma injury is capped at 41%. Consequently, the WCAB modified the award from 32% to 41% permanent disability.

Cumulative traumaCardiovascular systemHypertensionAtrial fibrillationHemorrhoidsLabor Code section 4664(c)(1)(G)Combined Values ChartQualified Medical EvaluatorLifetime capApportionment
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 12,831 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