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

Marcellino v. Nigro

Plaintiff Anthony Marcellino sustained injuries after falling through an open stairwell while working as a bricklayer on a construction project owned by John J. Nigro and with Beltrone Construction Company, Inc. as the general contractor. Plaintiffs initiated a suit alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241-a, moving for partial summary judgment on liability. Defendants cross-moved for summary judgment on indemnification claims. The Supreme Court denied all motions. The Appellate Division affirmed the denials, finding Labor Law § 240 (1) inapplicable to a lack of planking and ruling that Labor Law § 241-a did not require planking at that specific level, while violations of administrative rules do not establish absolute liability due to potential contributory negligence. The court also affirmed the denial of indemnification as negligence by the contractor or subcontractor was not established.

Construction AccidentLabor Law ViolationsSummary JudgmentIndemnificationStairwell FallWorker SafetyContributory NegligenceStatutory InterpretationAdministrative RulesGeneral Contractor Liability
References
8
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 08114
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 01, 2016

Matter of Kent D. (Rachel D.)

Petitioner Kent D. appealed an order from Family Court, New York County, which denied his motion for a forensic evaluation and granted the cross motion to dismiss his petition for visitation with his child. The background reveals that in February 2008, Kent D. stabbed Rachel D., the mother, seven times in front of their child, leading to his conviction for assault and child endangerment and an 11-year prison sentence. A 19-year order of protection was issued, prohibiting contact with the child. The Family Court had previously awarded custody to the mother, and a 2012 divorce judgment affirmed no visitation rights for Kent D. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding that Kent D. failed to make an evidentiary showing of changed circumstances required for a visitation hearing, and his claims of completing an anger management program were unsubstantiated. The court also noted the child's continuing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and desire not to see him.

Visitation RightsChild CustodyOrder of ProtectionDomestic ViolenceAssault ConvictionChanged CircumstancesForensic EvaluationAppellate ReviewFamily LawPost-Traumatic Stress Disorder
References
2
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 01533 [192 AD3d 1344]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 2021

Matter of Micah L. (Rachel L.)

This case concerns the appeal of Rachel L. and Robert L. from an order of the Family Court of Broome County, which granted the Broome County Department of Social Services' application to adjudicate their child, Micah L., as abandoned and terminated their parental rights. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reviewed the Family Court's findings, which established by clear and convincing evidence that both the mother and father failed to maintain contact with the child or the agency during the statutory six-month period. The court affirmed the termination of parental rights, concluding that the parents did not prove inability to maintain contact or that they were prevented from doing so, and that termination was in the child's best interests.

Parental Rights TerminationChild AbandonmentSocial Services Law § 384-bAppellate ReviewFamily CourtBest Interests of ChildDrug RehabilitationIncarcerationSupervised VisitationClear and Convincing Evidence
References
13
Case No. ADJ2704105
Regular
Aug 02, 2013

RACHEL ALEXANDER vs. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's dismissal of Rachel Alexander's workers' compensation case, which occurred before a merits adjudication due to her death. The Board held that the deceased applicant's death does not prevent the determination of accrued benefits for dependents or heirs under Labor Code section 4700. Dismissal without an evidentiary hearing violated due process, as workers' compensation proceedings do not allow for summary judgment motions. The case was returned for further proceedings and a decision on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationDismissalDue ProcessLabor Code section 3202Labor Code section 4700Accrued and unpaid benefitsInjury to respiratory systemInjury to internal systemsHeadaches
References
2
Case No. ADJ11421915
Regular
Aug 20, 2019

RACHEL NIGRO vs. ALLERGAN W.C. HOLDING, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and amended a previous decision. The amendment specifically subjected the award of temporary disability payments to the 104-week limit within a two-year period as stipulated by Labor Code section 4656(c)(2). The WCAB found that the administrative law judge's original decision failed to account for this statutory limitation. Otherwise, the WCAB affirmed the administrative law judge's decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRACHEL NIGROALLERGAN W.C. HOLDINGINC.ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANYADJ11421915Van Nuys District OfficePetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reporttemporary disability
References
0
Case No. ADJ540267 (GOL 0097056)
Regular
May 03, 2010

RACHEL RAMIREZ vs. SANTA BARBARA COTTAGE HOSPITAL, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision in the case of Rachel Ramirez v. Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital. The WCAB rescinded the ALJ's decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision. This action indicates the initial decision was insufficient or flawed, requiring further development of the record and a new ruling. The parties retain the right to seek reconsideration of any future decision by the ALJ.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardSanta Barbara Cottage HospitalKeenan & AssociatesPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeGranting ReconsiderationRescind DecisionFurther ProceedingsDecision After ReconsiderationTrial Level
References
0
Case No. ADJ2328480 (MON 0329780)
Regular
Feb 17, 2016

RACHEL WELLS vs. SELTZER FONTAINE BECKWITH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves applicant Rachel Wells seeking reconsideration of a prior Board decision that granted the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. Previously, the Board found the defendant's Utilization Review (UR) process was timely, rescinded an administrative law judge's award, and remanded for further proceedings. Wells now asks the Board to vacate that decision and deny the defendant's initial petition. The Board reviewed the matter and, for the reasons stated in its prior opinion, denied Wells's Petition for Reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and OrderFindings of Fact and AwardUtilization ReviewAdministrative Law JudgeRescindVacateSCIFMarina Del Rey
References
4
Case No. ADJ8654085
Regular
May 29, 2014

RACHEL KURTZ RIVERA vs. JO-ANN STORES, INC., ARCH INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Rachel Kurtz Rivera's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order, but rather an interlocutory procedural decision. The Board also denied her Petition for Removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCJ did not order suspension of benefits, only proceedings, and the matter of missed AME exam costs will be addressed by the WCJ after discovery is completed. The Board noted potential issues regarding applicant's attorney's representations about the missed exam and their potential for misleading statements or sanctions.

Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationSubstantial Prejudice
References
10
Case No. SAC 0346199
Regular
Jan 22, 2008

RACHEL ELIZONDO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend a previous award, primarily deferring the issue of attorney's fees under Labor Code section 4607 pending a Supreme Court decision. The Board affirmed the penalty for the unreasonable delay in authorizing a TENS unit and its supplies, but amended the penalty period for the cost of batteries and electrodes to July 10, 2007, through August 20, 2007, as stipulated by the parties. The case involved the Department of Motor Vehicles' delayed provision of a TENS unit to applicant Rachel Elizondo.

WCABReconsiderationLabor Code section 5814PenaltyUtilization ReviewTENS unitAttorney FeesLabor Code section 4607Medical TreatmentUnreasonable Denial
References
2
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 02617
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 04, 2019

Matter of Schaffer, Schonholz & Drossman, LLP v. Title

The Appellate Division, First Department, addressed a dispute over cash proceeds from the demutualization of Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company (MLMIC). Petitioner, Schaffer, Schonholz & Drossman, LLP, purchased the professional liability insurance policy and paid all associated premiums. Respondent, Rachel S. Title, M.D., was the named insured but did not contribute to the policy costs. The Court declared that the petitioner is entitled to the cash proceeds, including accrued interest, and directed the Clerk of Supreme Court, New York County, to enter judgment accordingly. The decision affirmed that awarding the proceeds to the respondent would constitute unjust enrichment, as she did not pay for the policy or bargain for the demutualization benefits.

Demutualization proceedsProfessional liability insuranceUnjust enrichmentInsurance policyPremium paymentsAppellate DivisionCivil ProcedureContract Law
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 35 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