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

In re Handicapped Child

The Orchard Park Central School District (District) sought a court-ordered subpoena for psychiatric and psychological records of an infant student from the Western New York Children’s Psychiatric Center. The District intended to use these records in an appeal initiated by the student's parents concerning the child's handicapping condition. The parents cross-moved to quash the subpoena, asserting the records were privileged and their consent for release had been withdrawn. Justice Thomas P. Flaherty ruled that no legislative exception existed to abrogate the physician-patient and psychologist-client privileges in this context, especially over parental objection. Consequently, the court denied the District's motion for the subpoena and granted the parents' cross-motion to quash, underscoring the protection of confidential communications in a child's best interests.

Education LawStudent RecordsPsychiatric RecordsPsychological RecordsPrivilegeSubpoena Duces TecumMotion to QuashParental RightsCommittee on HandicappedFair Hearing
References
17
Case No. ADJ3817836 (SJO 0250881)
Regular
May 31, 2012

ZUFAN A. REDA vs. FRY'S ELECTRONICS, INC., ZURICH NORTH AMERICAN INSURANCE

This case concerns applicant Zufan A. Reda's claim for permanent total disability due to a psychiatric injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is ordering the development of the record because neither the applicant's QME, Dr. Sidle, nor the defendant's QME, Dr. Keins, provided substantial evidence regarding the apportionment of psychiatric permanent disability. The WCAB found that Dr. Sidle's report incorrectly addressed causation of injury rather than apportionment of disability, and Dr. Keins' report was rejected as non-substantial due to prior rulings on industrial causation. Therefore, the WCAB has appointed Dr. Roy Curry as a "regular physician" to conduct a new evaluation on the issue of psychiatric permanent disability.

Petition for ReconsiderationDevelopment of RecordLabor Code section 5701Industrial InjuryPsychiatric InjuryCompensable ConsequenceSection 5803Section 5804Section 5410Permanent Total Disability
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Grief Bros.

This employment discrimination case, filed July 1, 2002, involves Michael Sabo (Plaintiff) who alleges constructive discharge based on sexual harassment and claims severe emotional pain and suffering. The Defendant moved for a mental examination of Sabo under Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 and to compel the production of his medical records. Sabo alleged severe humiliation, anxiety, depression, loss of self-esteem, sleeplessness, and weight gain, and admitted to a history of depression, past suicide attempts, and current psychiatric treatment with prescribed medications. The court granted the Defendant's motions, finding that Sabo had placed his mental condition in controversy due to the nature and severity of his claims and his medical history, justifying both the examination and the production of relevant medical records. The court also granted Defendant's request for costs associated with compelling the medical records, but denied the request for costs related to the Rule 35 motion itself, and denied Plaintiff's request for counsel or recording during the examination.

Employment DiscriminationSexual HarassmentConstructive DischargeEmotional DistressMental ExaminationRule 35Medical RecordsDepressionSuicide AttemptsCompensatory Damages
References
11
Case No. 24-110050
Regular Panel Decision
May 29, 2025

People v. S.

The defendant, S., faced charges of forcible touching and endangering the welfare of a child. The defense's motion to dismiss the case was rooted in claims of Speedy Trial violations, constitutional concerns regarding access to confidential psychiatric records, and arguments in the interest of justice. Specifically, the defense challenged the People's Certificate of Compliance, alleging non-disclosure of the complainant's psychiatric records from RCPC and other police/CPS records. The Justice Court denied the defendant's motion in its entirety, ruling that the complainant's psychiatric and CPS records are not discoverable under CPL Art. 245 in this non-court-of-record venue, and upholding the validity of the People's speedy trial declaration. The court further declined to dismiss the case on constitutional grounds or in the interest of justice.

Criminal ProcedureMental Hygiene LawJudiciary LawSpeedy TrialDiscovery ObligationsConfidentialityPsychiatric RecordsCourts of RecordJustice CourtSubpoena Duces Tecum
References
87
Case No. Motion sequence Nos. 002 and 005
Regular Panel Decision

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Escape Media Group, Inc.

UMG Recordings, Inc. sued Escape Media Group, Inc. for common-law copyright infringement and unfair competition. Escape asserted DMCA safe harbor and CDA preemption defenses, along with Donnelly Act and tortious interference counterclaims. The court denied UMG's motion to dismiss the DMCA safe harbor defense, ruling it applies to pre-1972 recordings. However, the court granted UMG's motion to dismiss the CDA preemption defense, clarifying that the CDA's intellectual property exemption covers both federal and state laws. Additionally, Escape's Donnelly Act counterclaim was dismissed, but UMG's motions to dismiss the tortious interference counterclaims were denied, rejecting defenses like the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and economic interest.

Copyright InfringementDMCA Safe HarborPre-1972 RecordingsUnfair CompetitionCommunications Decency ActTortious InterferenceDonnelly ActNew York Common LawInternet Service ProvidersAntitrust
References
34
Case No. ADJ6671882
Regular
Jul 31, 2009

ANGELICA ALMANZA vs. VOLER TEAM APPAREL, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

In this case, the defendant sought reconsideration of an award requiring neurological and psychiatric consultations for the applicant. The defendant argued that a psychiatric consultation was barred by Labor Code section 3208.3(d) as the applicant had less than six months of employment. However, the Appeals Board found the record inadequate to determine if a psychiatric injury was actually claimed. Therefore, the Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the award, and returned the matter for further proceedings to establish a proper record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngelica AlmanzaVoler Team ApparelBerkshire Hathaway Homestate CompaniesADJ6671882ReconsiderationFindings and AwardNeurological consultationsPsychiatric consultationsIndustrial injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ8276769
Regular
Jun 25, 2015

JAMES ROBINSON vs. REBAS, INC dba TOYOTA LIFT, ACE USA, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow further development of the medical record regarding applicant's psychiatric injury. While affirming the finding of no neck or back injury, the Board deferred the issue of psychiatric injury causation. This decision stems from the Qualified Medical Evaluator's need for additional records and applicant's testimony to provide a definitive opinion on whether employment events predominantly caused the alleged psychiatric harm. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on this specific issue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPSYCHIATRIC INJURYLABOR CODE SECTION 3208.3ACTUAL EVENTS OF EMPLOYMENTPREDOMINANT CAUSATIONMEDICAL RECORD DEVELOPMENTQUALIFIED MEDICAL EVALUATOROPINIONCAUSATIONRECONSIDERATION
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zimmer v. Cathedral School of St. Mary & St. Paul

This case involves an appeal concerning discovery in a personal injury action between plaintiff Michael Zimmer and defendant David Zoni, stemming from an altercation. Zoni sought disclosure of Zimmer's psychiatric, social worker, and tax records, arguing relevance to the extent of injuries and the identity of the aggressor. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, initially compelled disclosure. However, the Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that Zimmer's alleged violent propensity was not in issue, thereby protecting his psychiatric and social worker records under privilege. The court also found Zoni failed to demonstrate a strong showing of necessity for Zimmer's tax records, thus denying their disclosure.

personal injurydiscovery disputeprotective ordermedical records privilegepsychiatric recordssocial worker recordstax recordsdisclosurewaiver of privilegeappellate reversal
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re K.M.

The New York County District Attorney's Office (DA) filed an ex parte application for a subpoena duces tecum seeking K.M.'s psychiatric records and access to treating hospital staff. K.M. was committed to the Commissioner of Mental Health after pleading not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect. The court granted the DA's request for K.M.'s psychiatric records but denied the request to interview treating psychiatrists and psychologists, citing psychotherapist-patient privilege. The court found that the interests of justice did not significantly outweigh K.M.'s right to confidentiality, suggesting that the DA could interview a member of Kirby's Psychiatric Committee instead.

Mental HealthPsychiatric RecordsSubpoena Duces TecumPsychotherapist-Patient PrivilegeConfidentialityCPL 330.20Dangerous Mental ConditionWaiver of PrivilegeNew York LawCriminal Procedure Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Bonilla

Claimant, a postal worker, was arrested for threatening suicide and subsequently required to undergo a psychiatric evaluation by releasing his medical records to determine his fitness for duty. He refused to release these records, which prevented the completion of the psychiatric examination and ultimately led to him not being permitted to return to work. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board then disqualified him from receiving unemployment insurance benefits, ruling that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. This decision was based on the premise that a claimant who fails to take a reasonably required step as a prerequisite to continued employment is deemed to have voluntarily left their job without good cause. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, finding it supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Voluntary separationUnemployment benefitsGood cause for leaving employmentMedical records releaseFitness for dutyPsychiatric evaluationPostal workerDisqualification from benefitsSubstantial evidence
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 4,717 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