Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ8920582

Regular

May 20, 2013

DAVID SMITH vs. RMD REBAR, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an applicant's petition for reconsideration of an Arbitrator's decision regarding disputed medical treatment. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the applicant's initial petition was timely filed but inadvertently lost by the Board. This misplacement tolled the 60-day statutory review period, allowing the Board to now consider the applicant's arguments. The Board intends to obtain an Arbitrator's report and further study the case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationArbitrator's Findings And Orderindustrial injurymedical treatmentunreasonably delayunreasonably refusepenaltyattorney fees10859 Order

References

Case No. ADJ8920582 (LBO 0029109)

Regular

Oct 10, 2013

DAVID SMITH vs. RMD REBAR, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant's claim for workers' compensation medical treatment, specifically facet blocks and a spinal cord stimulator. The Appeals Board affirmed an arbitrator's July 31, 2012 decision, as amended, finding no unreasonable delay in authorizing this treatment after prior related decisions. The Board also affirmed a June 14, 2013 decision by another arbitrator, which imposed a penalty and awarded attorney's fees for defendant's unreasonable delay in authorizing separate treatment (radio frequency ablation). The Appeals Board emphasized the importance of attorney fees to ensure injured workers have recourse for denied medical treatment, even without a monetary award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAttorney's FeesMedical TreatmentArbitratorFindings and OrderSan FranciscoSeabright Insurance CompanyRMD RebarDavid Smith

References

Case No. ADJ2591614 (MON 301409) ADJ3783399 (MON 303806)

Regular

May 13, 2009

John Cromwell vs. RMD REBAR, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award due to unclear reasoning and an incomplete record. The Board remanded the case for a new decision, requiring the judge to address all contentions regarding the calculation of temporary disability, penalties for late payments, attorney's fees, and defendant's credit for prior payments. Both applicant and defendant had petitioned for reconsideration, raising issues such as the correct calculation of benefits, additional penalties, and the application of Labor Code section 4659(c). The Board emphasized the need for a clear record and a comprehensive decision explaining the judge's determinations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent DisabilityPenaltiesAttorney's FeesLabor Code section 4659(c)Credit for PaymentsStipulated Award

References

Case No. ADJ7776439

Regular

Mar 30, 2012

MOISES VASQUEZ vs. RMD REBAR INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns a dispute over the allocation of attorney's fees between two law firms representing the applicant. The arbitrator divided fees based on the time each firm represented the applicant, awarding the current attorney $11,750.00 and the former attorney $4,000.00 plus $650.00. The current attorney sought reconsideration, arguing the division was inadequate and lacked proper findings. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the arbitrator's decision, and returned the matter for a new decision due to a deficient record lacking findings, stipulations, or evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAttorney FeesReconsiderationArbitrationCompromise and ReleaseTemporary Disability IndemnityFindings of FactLabor Code Section 5313Record AdequacyDue Process

References

Case No. ADJ9554701

Regular

Nov 02, 2014

EDGAR VILLARREAL vs. ALAMILLO REBAR, INC., OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Edgar Villarreal against Alamillo Rebar, Inc. and its insurer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the petition and the administrative law judge's report. Concluding that the reasons stated in the judge's report were sufficient, the WCAB denied the Petition for Removal.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport of JudgeDenial of RemovalAlamillo RebarOld Republic General InsuranceGallagher Bassett ServicesEdgar VillarrealADJ9554701

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Brown v. 44th Street Development, LLC

Plaintiff Donald Brown, a carpenter, sustained injuries after falling through rebar while working on a construction site in Manhattan. He was carrying lumber and walking on elevated rebar when his feet slipped into an opening. Plaintiff sought summary judgment under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6), while defendants moved to dismiss claims under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The court granted plaintiff summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability, finding the defendants failed to provide adequate safety devices for an elevation-related hazard. However, claims under Labor Law §§ 241 (6) and 200 were dismissed, as the rebar was integral to the ongoing work and the hazard was deemed open and obvious, respectively.

construction accidentworker injuryLabor Lawscaffold lawsummary judgmentliabilityelevation hazardrebar fallNew York Labor Lawworksite safety

References

Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 04771 [241 AD3d 892]

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 27, 2025

Impagliazzo v. Judlau Contr., Inc.

Ciro Impagliazzo, a foreman for a plumbing subcontractor, sustained injuries after falling on a rebar mat dotted with protruding Nelson studs at a Metropolitan Transportation Authority construction project. He commenced an action against Judlau Contracting, Inc., the general contractor, and the MTA, alleging violations of Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing these causes of action. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's order, finding that the defendants failed to eliminate all triable issues of fact regarding whether the rebar mat constituted a dangerous condition, whether they had actual or constructive notice, and if traversing such a mat was an inherent risk of the plaintiff's work.

Labor Law § 200Common Law NegligenceConstruction SafetyDangerous ConditionPremises LiabilityWorker InjurySummary Judgment DenialAppellate ReviewRebar MatNelson Studs

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Barillaro v. Beechwood RB Shorehaven, LLC

Joseph Barillaro, a plumber’s helper, was injured while working on a construction site owned by the defendant when the ground collapsed, causing him to fall and strike his eye on an uncapped rebar. He initiated action under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), and for common-law negligence. The Supreme Court dismissed the Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) claims, finding no gravity-related risk and that the trench was not a 'hazardous opening' under the Industrial Code. However, the Appellate Division determined the Supreme Court erred in dismissing the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, as the defendant failed to establish a prima facie case by not addressing the dangerous condition of the uncapped rebar, focusing instead on supervision, which was irrelevant to an injury arising from a premises defect.

Construction AccidentLabor Law Section 200Labor Law Section 240(1)Labor Law Section 241(6)Common-Law NegligencePremises LiabilityUncapped RebarHazardous OpeningSummary Judgment MotionAppellate Division Review

References

Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 08639 [167 AD3d 865]

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 19, 2018

Mitchell v. Caton on the Park, LLC

The plaintiff, a carpenter employed by Titus Associates, Inc., sustained personal injuries after tripping on rebar at a construction site. The plaintiff brought an action against Caton on the Park, LLC, the premises owner, and Springline Builders, LLC, the construction manager, alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6). The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to Springline Builders, LLC, dismissing the causes of action against it. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order. The court determined that Labor Law § 241 (6) was inapplicable as the rebar was an integral part of the work, and Springline demonstrated it lacked authority to supervise or control the plaintiff's work or the worksite, and did not create or have notice of the dangerous condition under Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence.

Construction Site AccidentPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentLabor Law § 200Labor Law § 241 (6)Industrial Code 12 NYCRR § 23-1.7 (e)Rebar HazardIntegral Part of WorkSupervision and ControlPremises Liability

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 15, 2011

Giovanniello v. E.W. Howell, Co.

This case involves an appeal by the plaintiffs in a consolidated action seeking damages for personal injuries. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, had granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint against defendants Fratello Construction Corp., Recine Materials Corp., and PMC Rebar, Inc. The appellate court affirmed this decision. The court's analysis focused on liability under Labor Law §§ 240, 241, and 200, as well as common-law negligence. It found that Fratello Construction Corp., a prime contractor, was not liable due to a lack of privity of contract with the injured plaintiffs' employer and no delegated authority to oversee their activities. Similarly, subcontractors Recine Materials Corp. and PMC Rebar, Inc., were found not liable as they did not control the work that caused the injury nor create an unreasonable risk of harm. The appellate court also rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the granting of summary judgment was premature.

Summary JudgmentPersonal InjuryLabor Law Section 240Labor Law Section 241Labor Law Section 200Common-Law NegligencePrivity of ContractSubcontractor LiabilityContractor LiabilityWorksite Safety

References

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.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ8920582

Regular

May 20, 2013

DAVID SMITH vs. RMD REBAR, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationArbitrator's Findings And Orderindustrial injurymedical treatmentunreasonably delayunreasonably refusepenaltyattorney fees10859 Order

References

Case No. ADJ8920582 (LBO 0029109)

Regular

Oct 10, 2013

DAVID SMITH vs. RMD REBAR, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAttorney's FeesMedical TreatmentArbitratorFindings and OrderSan FranciscoSeabright Insurance CompanyRMD RebarDavid Smith

References

Case No. ADJ2591614 (MON 301409) ADJ3783399 (MON 303806)

Regular

May 13, 2009

John Cromwell vs. RMD REBAR, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

References

Case No. ADJ7776439

Regular

Mar 30, 2012

MOISES VASQUEZ vs. RMD REBAR INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAttorney FeesReconsiderationArbitrationCompromise and ReleaseTemporary Disability IndemnityFindings of FactLabor Code Section 5313Record AdequacyDue Process

References

Case No. ADJ9554701

Regular

Nov 02, 2014

EDGAR VILLARREAL vs. ALAMILLO REBAR, INC., OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Brown v. 44th Street Development, LLC

construction accidentworker injuryLabor Lawscaffold lawsummary judgmentliabilityelevation hazardrebar fallNew York Labor Lawworksite safety

References

Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 04771 [241 AD3d 892]

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 27, 2025

Impagliazzo v. Judlau Contr., Inc.

Labor Law § 200Common Law NegligenceConstruction SafetyDangerous ConditionPremises LiabilityWorker InjurySummary Judgment DenialAppellate ReviewRebar MatNelson Studs

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Barillaro v. Beechwood RB Shorehaven, LLC

References

Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 08639 [167 AD3d 865]

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 19, 2018

Mitchell v. Caton on the Park, LLC

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 15, 2011

Giovanniello v. E.W. Howell, Co.

Summary JudgmentPersonal InjuryLabor Law Section 240Labor Law Section 241Labor Law Section 200Common-Law NegligencePrivity of ContractSubcontractor LiabilityContractor LiabilityWorksite Safety

References

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.