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. 2022 NY Slip Op 00289
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2022

Matter of Personal-Touch Home Care of N.Y., Inc. v. City of N.Y. Human Resources Admin.

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, which denied a petition to overturn a decision by the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Contract Dispute Resolution Board (CDRB). The CDRB had found that Personal-Touch Home Care's claim to use unspent Medicaid funds for fiscal year 2007 to offset workers' compensation assessment expenses from 2009-2010 was foreclosed. The court agreed that the State Department of Health (DOH) rationally interpreted its regulations, concluding that these retroactive assessments, levied due to financial mismanagement of a self-insurance trust, were not

Workers' CompensationMedicaid FundsSelf-Insurance TrustFiscal YearRetroactive AssessmentAdministrative LawAgency DeferenceContract DisputeHealth Care AgenciesFinancial Mismanagement
References
4
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 04454 [219 AD3d 22]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2023

Matter of Afra

Attorney Sam Afra faced four charges of professional misconduct, primarily involving escrow-related issues. The Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District filed a petition alleging misappropriation of funds, maintenance of negative escrow account balances, and payment of personal/business expenses from the escrow account. A Special Referee sustained all four charges. The Court considered mitigating factors like personal hardships and remedial actions, but also aggravating factors such as repeated negative balances and unauthorized withdrawals. Ultimately, the Court ordered Sam Afra's suspension from the practice of law for a period of six months, commencing September 29, 2023.

Professional MisconductEscrow Account ViolationsMisappropriation of FundsAttorney SuspensionFiduciary DutyRules of Professional ConductDisciplinary ActionGrievance CommitteeEthical ViolationFinancial Mismanagement
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Ciervo

The Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts brought a charge of professional misconduct against respondent Ralph E. Ciervo for failing to cooperate with investigations regarding complaints from Herbert S. Gulston and Julie Medina. A Special Referee sustained the charge, and the Grievance Committee moved to confirm the report. The respondent admitted to the non-cooperation, citing personal difficulties including job loss, recession impact on his practice, and severe injuries from accidents leading to depression and impaired judgment due to pain medication. The Court granted the motion to confirm the Special Referee’s report and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for one year, with conditions for reinstatement including medical reports on his physical and mental health.

Professional misconductAttorney suspensionGrievance CommitteeFailure to cooperateRules of Professional ConductMitigationMedical conditionMental healthReinstatement conditionsDisciplinary action
References
0
Case No. 526722
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2019

Matter of Persons v. Halmar Intl., LLC

Claimant Matthew Persons appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found he violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a by exaggerating his condition and failing to disclose volunteer firefighter activities, leading to disqualification from future wage replacement benefits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found the Board's decision was not supported by substantial evidence, as it was based on speculation, surmise, and mischaracterizations of claimant's activities and medical records. The court noted that claimant was forthcoming about his volunteer work and that video surveillance did not conclusively contradict his reported injuries. Consequently, the decision was reversed, and the matter was remitted to the Board for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation LawFraudExaggerated ConditionVolunteer Firefighter ActivitiesWage Replacement BenefitsSubstantial EvidenceMedical TestimonyPsychiatric DisabilityVideo SurveillanceRemittal
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Carey & Westinghouse Electric Corp.

The case involves cross-appeals from an order of Special Term concerning the arbitration of discharge grievances in Buffalo and furlough grievances in Sharon under a collective bargaining agreement. The Special Term had denied arbitration for the Buffalo discharge grievances, which the appellate court found to be a misconception of the court's role in arbitration. The appellate court emphasized that only the existence of an agreement to arbitrate and a dispute thereunder should be considered, leaving matters of law and fact to the arbitrators. The court also deemed the question of public policy overriding arbitration rules premature. Regarding the Sharon furlough claims, the Special Term's decision to compel arbitration was affirmed, with the appellate court rejecting claims of Federal preemption. The final order was modified to grant the petitioner's motion to compel arbitration for the Buffalo discharge grievances and affirmed in all other respects.

ArbitrationCollective BargainingLabor DisputeDischarge GrievancesFurlough GrievancesCross-AppealSpecial Term OrderPublic PolicyFederal PreemptionAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04638 [197 AD3d 800]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 05, 2021

Matter of McMillian v. Krygier

Petitioner, an incarcerated person, challenged a reduction in his pay rate by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) after refusing to participate in recommended programming. His grievance was denied by the facility Superintendent and his subsequent appeal to the Central Office Review Committee (CORC) remained undecided for over eight months. Petitioner then initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which the Supreme Court dismissed on the merits. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment. The court found that exhaustion of administrative remedies was excused due to both futility and the presence of pure questions of law, concluding that DOCCS's policies linking pay reduction to program refusal were within its statutory authority and were properly applied.

Inmate RightsPrison AdministrationAdministrative RemediesExhaustion DoctrineCPLR Article 78 ReviewNew York State LawCorrectional FacilitiesDue ProcessGrievance ProceduresJudicial Review
References
30
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 04524 [186 AD3d 23]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 2020

Matter of Doris

The Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) initiated a disciplinary proceeding against attorney Lawrence A. Doris following client complaints of professional misconduct, including failure to file a personal injury case and lack of communication. Despite numerous attempts by the AGC through letters, emails, and a judicial subpoena, Mr. Doris failed to respond to the allegations or appear for a deposition. The AGC subsequently moved for his immediate suspension from the practice of law due to his willful noncompliance and failure to cooperate with their investigation. The Appellate Division, First Department, granted the AGC's motion, finding that Mr. Doris's conduct warranted immediate suspension. This decision underscores the importance of attorney cooperation in disciplinary matters and protection of the public interest.

Attorney disciplineProfessional misconductNoncooperation with investigationImmediate suspensionGrievance CommitteeClient complaintFailure to communicateJudicial subpoenaPublic interest threatAppellate Division
References
6
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 03294 [184 AD3d 223]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 11, 2020

Matter of Mauser

Marc R. Mauser, an attorney, was publicly censured by the Appellate Division, First Department, for professional misconduct. The Attorney Grievance Committee initiated disciplinary action against him for neglecting a client's personal injury case, failing to communicate for approximately 18 months, and making misrepresentations to the client, mediator, and the Committee regarding the case status and reasons for delays. Mauser also failed to diligently finalize a settlement and disburse funds promptly. The parties reached a joint agreement for discipline by consent, stipulating to violations of several Rules of Professional Conduct, including neglect of a legal matter, failure to promptly comply with client requests for information, failure to act with reasonable diligence, inadequate supervision of staff, and engaging in dishonest conduct. Despite aggravating factors, mitigating factors such as no prior discipline and acceptance of responsibility led to the agreed-upon sanction of public censure, which the Court granted.

Attorney disciplineprofessional misconductneglect of dutyfailure to communicatemisrepresentationpublic censureRules of Professional Conductsettlement delayclient communicationsupervisory failures
References
3
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 01613 [183 AD3d 56]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 11, 2020

Matter of Cardillo

The Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts moved to confirm a Special Referee's report against Harry A. Cardillo, a suspended attorney. Cardillo was charged with two counts of misappropriating client funds from his escrow account in two separate personal injury matters in violation of rule 1.15(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, he allowed the balance in his escrow account to fall below the amounts due to his clients and to satisfy a workers' compensation lien. The Special Referee sustained both charges, and the Appellate Division, Second Department, confirmed the report, noting Cardillo's failure to honor his fiduciary obligations and his prior disciplinary record. Consequently, Cardillo was suspended from the practice of law for three years, effective immediately, without credit for time already served under an interim suspension.

Attorney DisciplineProfessional MisconductMisappropriation of FundsEscrow Account ViolationsSuspension of AttorneyGrievance CommitteeRules of Professional Conduct 1.15(a)Fiduciary DutyAppellate Division Second Department
References
5
Case No. 2022-06115
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 10, 2025

Matter of Plasse

The Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts initiated disciplinary proceedings against attorney Andrew F. Plasse for professional misconduct involving his escrow account. Plasse faced four charges: misappropriating client funds through deficiencies in his escrow account, commingling personal and client funds by depositing earned legal fees, routinely failing to promptly withdraw earned fees, and failing to maintain accurate bookkeeping records. A Special Referee sustained all charges, which Plasse did not contest, offering mitigation. Considering Plasse's prior disciplinary history, including a public censure, the Court granted the motion to confirm the report and suspended him from the practice of law for a period of one year, commencing October 10, 2025.

Attorney disciplineProfessional misconductEscrow account violationsClient fund misappropriationCommingling fundsBookkeeping failuresLawyer suspensionGrievance CommitteeAppellate DivisionJudicial ethics
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 3,159 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