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

Ornstein v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

This case addresses the viability of claims for emotional and psychological injury, specifically AIDS phobia and post-traumatic stress disorder, following an HIV exposure. The plaintiff, a nurse, was accidentally pricked by a contaminated needle and subsequently developed severe emotional distress. The Supreme Court had allowed her claims for post-traumatic stress disorder to extend beyond the established six-month limitation for AIDS phobia. However, this appellate court reversed that decision, ruling that all related emotional damages must adhere to the six-month period, based on the scientific consensus regarding the likelihood of HIV infection detection.

AIDS PhobiaHIV ExposureEmotional DistressPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderNegligent Infliction of Emotional DistressSix-Month Limitation RuleMedical ConsensusObjective StandardNeedle Stick InjuryWorkers' Compensation Psychiatrist
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 2006

Sanchez v. City of New York

The Supreme Court, New York County, denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a settlement pertaining to an infant plaintiff's emotional injuries. The appellate court unanimously affirmed this denial. Plaintiffs, including the infant's guardian, claimed they only discovered the true extent of the infant's emotional injuries, including post-traumatic stress syndrome, in the summer of 2005 following an examination by a social worker. However, the court found that these psychological injuries were known from the case's inception in 2001 and were appropriately considered when the settlement was agreed upon in December 2004. Evidence, including a 2001 psychiatric evaluation, confirmed the infant's diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder prior to the settlement agreement.

Settlement DisputeInfant's RightsPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderVacating SettlementCompromise OrderPsychological HarmSearch Warrant ExecutionAppellate AffirmationParental GuardianJudicial Discretion
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Guess v. Finger Lakes Ambulance

The claimant, a paramedic, suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder after responding to a fatal industrial accident where a victim conversed with her before succumbing to horrific injuries. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found the injury accidental, the Workers' Compensation Board later disallowed the claim, asserting that the stress was not greater than what a paramedic typically experiences. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing evidence that paramedics are routinely exposed to traumatic events. This ruling emphasizes that for a mental injury from psychic trauma to be compensable, the stress must exceed that of a similarly situated worker's normal work environment.

Post-Traumatic Stress DisorderParamedicAccidental InjuryPsychic TraumaWorkers' Compensation BenefitsStress-Related InjuryNormal Work EnvironmentTraumatic Event ExposureMental Injury CompensabilityAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of D'Errico v. New York City Department of Corrections

Claimant, a maintenance worker for the New York City Department of Corrections, sought workers' compensation benefits for severe major depressive disorder with psychotic features, post-traumatic stress disorder, and panic disorder, which he attributed to exposure to violent incidents at work. The Workers' Compensation Board denied his claim, concluding he was not exposed to greater work-related stress than similarly situated employees. Claimant appealed both the initial denial (April 20, 2007) and the subsequent denial of reconsideration/full Board review (January 23, 2008), but failed to timely perfect the appeal from the initial decision. Consequently, the court's review was limited to whether the Board abused its discretion in denying reconsideration. Finding no abuse of discretion, as the claimant presented no new evidence or material change in conditions, and the Board had fully considered the issues, the court affirmed the Board's decision.

Mental Health ClaimsDepressive DisorderPTSDPanic DisorderWorkplace StressAppellate ReviewBoard ReconsiderationFull Board ReviewDiscretionary ReviewTimeliness of Appeal
References
20
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04075
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 24, 2021

Matter of Traverso v. DiNapoli

Petitioner Manuel Traverso Jr., a former State Police investigator, sought accidental disability retirement benefits due to post-traumatic stress disorder, manic depression, and anxiety stemming from his dangerous undercover narcotics work. His duties involved interacting with drug cartels and informants, exposing him to traumatic events. After a panic attack in 2015, he was diagnosed and deemed unable to work, leading to his application for benefits. The New York State and Local Retirement System and subsequently the Comptroller denied his application, ruling that his disability was not the result of an 'accident' as defined by Retirement and Social Security Law § 363, but rather from the inherent risks of his job. The Appellate Division, Third Department, confirmed the Comptroller's determination, finding substantial evidence that the stress causing his mental injuries was an ordinary part of his duties. Consequently, the court dismissed his petition, affirming that his injuries were not accidental.

Accidental Disability Retirement BenefitsPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderUndercover Narcotics InvestigatorState PoliceRetirement and Social Security LawCPLR Article 78 ProceedingComptroller's DeterminationSubstantial EvidenceOrdinary Course of Job DutiesMental Injuries
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Brown v. Alos Micrographics Corp.

Claimant sought workers' compensation benefits after experiencing sexual harassment from a co-employee at Alos Micrographics Corporation, leading to stress and anxiety. The incidents included inappropriate comments and descriptions of dreams, causing the claimant to leave her job. Medical experts diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder causally related to the workplace harassment. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and Board found a compensable injury and awarded benefits, a decision affirmed by the appellate court. The employer and its carrier appealed the finding of an accidental psychic injury, but the Board's determination was upheld due to substantial evidence and credible medical testimony.

Sexual HarassmentWorkplace StressPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderWorkers' CompensationAccidental Psychic InjuryPsychiatric InjuryAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceMedical TestimonyEmployment Dispute
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 1996

Claim of Palevsky v. New York City Board of Education

In 1986, while working as an education associate in the Bronx, the claimant sustained a fractured nose due to a student altercation and filed a timely workers' compensation claim, receiving benefits. The case remained open for a pending nasal surgery issue. Years later, in 1992, the claimant sought compensation for alleged consequential posttraumatic stress disorder. The self-insured employer, the New York City Board of Education, argued that Workers' Compensation Law § 28, a two-year statute of limitations, barred this new claim. However, both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board affirmed that Section 28 does not apply to consequential injuries. Upon appeal, the Court concurred, holding that a subsequent claim for disability compensation related to injuries in an earlier, timely claim is not barred by the two-year limit for amendment.

Workers' CompensationPosttraumatic Stress DisorderStatute of LimitationsConsequential InjuryWorkers' Compensation Law § 28Time BarBoard DecisionAppealWorkplace InjuryNasal Fracture
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hansen v. Post

The petitioner, a child protective worker, sought custody of Christopher Post, whose parents, Rose and William Post, had a documented history of child abuse and neglect, leading to the removal of seven other children from their care. Christopher had also been involved in two prior neglect proceedings. The parents exhibited severe deficiencies in parenting skills, an inability to address Christopher's emotional disturbances, and a history of rejecting assistance. After voluntarily placing Christopher with the petitioner, who became his psychological parent, they abruptly cut off contact. The Family Court found extraordinary circumstances, justified judicial intervention, and granted custody to the petitioner, a decision which the appellate court subsequently affirmed.

Custody DisputeParental UnfitnessChild NeglectExtraordinary CircumstancesFamily Court Act Article 6Child Protective ServicesAppealParental RightsPsychological ParentEmotional Disturbance
References
5
Case No. ADJ9418197
Regular
Jan 02, 2020

ALEXANDER GOLIS vs. PACTIV CORP., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY ON BEHALF OF SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the employer's petition for reconsideration in the case of Alexander Golis v. Pactiv Corp. The WCAB adopted the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) that neither Dr. Kettner's nor Dr. Anderson's apportionment opinions constituted substantial evidence. Consequently, the employer failed to meet its burden of proving apportionment for the applicant's post-traumatic stress disorder.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDeniedPost-traumatic stress disorderPTSDImpairmentApportionmentSubstantial evidenceBurden of proofWCJ
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dzwielewski v. McCall

The petitioner, a nurse supervisor, applied for accidental disability retirement benefits after a psychiatric patient attempted to assault him on June 15, 1994, causing alleged permanent disability from intense work-related depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. The application was denied because the incident was found not to be an 'accident' within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 605 (b) (3), as attempted assaults were considered an inherent and anticipated risk of his employment duties. The court confirmed the respondent's determination, finding no reason to disturb it and dismissing the petition.

accidental disability retirementnurse supervisorpsychiatric patientassault incidentpost-traumatic stress disorderwork-related depressionemployment riskretirement benefits denialCPLR article 78disability claim
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,584 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