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

Huntington Hospital v. Huntington Hospital Nurses' Ass'n

Huntington Hospital initiated an action under the Federal Arbitration Act to partially vacate an arbitration award, while the Huntington Hospital Nurses’ Association cross-petitioned to confirm it. The dispute originated from the Hospital unilaterally granting two nurses, Betty Evans and Lynn Meyer, longevity pay credits exceeding the ten-year cap stipulated in their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The arbitrator found the Hospital violated the CBA's sections on pay and exclusive bargaining rights. The arbitrator mandated the Hospital roll back excess credits and recover overpayments. The District Court denied the Hospital's petition, dismissing arguments regarding public policy, manifest disregard for law, and lack of award finality, ultimately confirming the arbitration award.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementLabor LawFederal Arbitration ActWage DisputesLongevity PayUnion RightsPublic Policy ExceptionManifest Disregard of LawContract Interpretation
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re New York Methodist Hospital

New York Methodist Hospital filed an order to show cause on June 1, 2009, seeking a judgment under Public Health Law § 2801-c to compel respondent E.H. to discharge himself from the hospital and accept placement in a skilled nursing facility. The hospital also sought to seal court records. Respondent, E.H., opposed the discharge. A bedside hearing was conducted on June 2, 2009, where testimony from medical staff and family members was heard. The court found that E.H., a 32-year-old bedridden male with complex medical needs, no longer required acute hospital care and was competent to make decisions, but unreasonably refused discharge plans. Despite the hospital's diligent search, the only facility willing and able to meet his needs was Daughters of Jacob Nursing Home (DOJ), which E.H. refused. The court granted the hospital's application for an injunction to compel E.H.'s discharge and to accept appropriate placement, and also granted the request to seal the court records to protect his medical privacy.

Patient DischargeInjunctionPublic Health LawMedical CapacityNursing Home PlacementHospital Discharge PlanningPatient RightsSealing Court RecordsMedicare/Medicaid ServicesSkilled Nursing Facility
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Casillo v. St. John's Episcopal Hospital

This case addresses the fees hospitals can charge for patient medical records requested by authorized attorneys. Petitioners Domenic Casillo, Jr. and Barbara Blaskey, represented by Ungar, Gerstman & Pomerance, sought their hospital files from St. John’s Episcopal Hospital for a personal injury lawsuit against Huntington Hilton Hotel. The hospital demanded a flat fee of $35 per patient, while petitioners argued the fee should be capped at 75 cents per page under recent amendments to Public Health Law §§ 17 and 18, effective September 1, 1991. The court ruled that attorneys acting as authorized representatives of patients are "qualified persons" under the Public Health Law and are subject to the 75-cents-per-page cap for reproducing medical records. The court granted the petitioners' application, directing the hospital to comply.

Medical Record FeesPatient AccessHospital PolicyStatutory InterpretationPublic Health LawCPLR DiscoveryAttorney AuthorizationReasonable ChargeHealthcare CostsLitigation Preparation
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

League of Voluntary Hospitals & Homes v. Local 1199, Drug, Hospital & Health Care Workers Union

The court addresses an application for a preliminary injunction against Local 1199, a union planning a three-day strike. The League of Voluntary Hospitals and Homes of N. Y. sought the injunction following a previous temporary restraining order concerning a one-day strike. The union argued that each planned strike required a new legal proceeding, but the court deemed the strikes "episodic and organically connected." Citing concerns about blocked ingress/egress to hospitals and the union president's threats to "shut down" facilities, the judge found a preliminary injunction necessary under Labor Law § 807 to protect public health and safety. The injunction restrains the union from unlawfully interfering with hospital operations, blocking access, and picketing within certain distances of hospital entrances and emergency rooms.

Labor DisputePreliminary InjunctionStrike ActionUnion ActivityHospital AccessPicketing RegulationsCollective BargainingCivil Disobedience ThreatPublic Health and SafetyIngress Egress Interference
References
1
Case No. ADJ8005462
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

PEDRO VALDERRAMA, SR. (Deceased), MARIA SOLIS (Spouse) et al. vs. LOS AMIGOS CONSTRUCTION, ACEO PAYROLL CO., CASTLE POINT INSURANCE CO., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the original award finding that Pedro Valderrama's death on September 25, 2009, was industrially caused. The Board found substantial evidence supported that Castle Point Insurance Company was the insurer for Los Amigos Construction at the time of the injury, despite petitioners' claims that payroll services had switched to Select Focus. Evidence indicated that Select Focus had not finalized any agreement or secured insurance coverage for Los Amigos Construction before the date of injury, and that Castle Point's policy was still in effect. The Board also noted a prior OSHA decision that similarly found Select Focus was not the employer and had no exposure in this case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPedro ValderramaMaria SolisLos Amigos ConstructionACEO Payroll Co.Castle Point Insurance Co.ACE American Insurance Co.Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Awardindustrial injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ4213823 (AHM 014404)
Regular
Aug 23, 2010

RODOLFO PLASCENCIA (Deceased) TERESA PLASCENCIA (Widow) vs. LOS ANGELES DODGERS; ACE USA, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration by a lien claimant, Rancho Los Amigos Medical Center, regarding a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board denied reconsideration, affirming its prior decision that benefits were barred under section 3600(a)(4) and that the lien claim was not allowed. The denial was based on the existing record and applicable law, with no new evidence considered due to procedural violations. However, one commissioner dissented, arguing that the defendant failed to prove intoxication was a substantial factor in the applicant's injury and would have reversed the decision.

Rodolfo PlascenciaLos Angeles DodgersACE USASedgwick Claims Management ServicesADJ4213823Opinion and Order Denying Reconsiderationlien claimRancho Los Amigos Medical CenterSection 3600(a)(4)intoxication
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 07, 1975

Buchanan v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

The case concerns an appeal challenging a hospital lien and the application of a contractual period of limitations in an insurance policy. The plaintiff, as executrix of Percy Buchanan, sought to challenge a lien filed by the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation and compel Associated Hospital Services (AHS) to cover remaining hospital costs. The lower court initially granted AHS summary judgment, finding the action time-barred. However, the appellate court modified this decision, denying AHS's cross-motion for summary judgment. It ruled that a question of fact existed regarding whether AHS could be estopped from asserting the limitations period, given its silence on claim rejections until after the period had expired.

Hospital LienContractual Limitations PeriodSummary Judgment MotionEquitable EstoppelHealth Insurance PolicyStatute of LimitationsAppellate Court DecisionInsurance Coverage DisputeExecutorshipGroup Health Insurance
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2006

Ochei v. Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital

Plaintiff Joan Ochei brought an action against Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital and New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, alleging discrimination based on race and national origin, a hostile work environment, and retaliation, leading to constructive discharge. Ochei, a Licensed Practical Nurse, claimed inadequate training, negative evaluations, and transfer were discriminatory. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Ochei failed to establish a prima facie case. The court granted summary judgment, dismissing the complaint, finding no evidence to support Ochei's claims of discrimination, a hostile work environment, or constructive discharge. Additionally, Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital was deemed not a suable entity.

DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationConstructive DischargeSummary JudgmentEmployment LawTitle VIINew York State Human Rights Law
References
47
Case No. ADJ19483147
Regular
Jun 19, 2025

MICHAEL LEWIS vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the arbitrator's Amended Findings and Award from April 8, 2024, in the case of Michael Lewis v. City of Los Angeles. The Board previously granted reconsideration due to an incomplete record, specifically missing exhibits and vocational evidence. The defendant, City of Los Angeles, sought reconsideration, asserting errors in the arbitrator's finding of catastrophic injury and permanent total disability. The WCAB emphasized the importance of due process and a complete evidentiary record for meaningful review, citing several legal precedents. The matter is returned to the arbitrator for further proceedings and to supplement the record.

WCABReconsiderationAmended Findings and AwardArbitratorCity of Los AngelesCatastrophic injuryPermanent total disabilityLabor CodeBack injuryPetition for Reconsideration
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 1977

Milashouskas v. Mercy Hospital

Plaintiff Judith Milashouskas, a nurse, sustained injuries while working at Mercy Hospital and received medical treatment at the hospital's emergency room. She and her husband initiated a medical malpractice action, alleging damages from negligent treatment. Mercy Hospital asserted an affirmative defense under Workers’ Compensation Law § 29(6), arguing the action was barred. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, dismissed this defense, a decision affirmed on appeal. The appellate court found that Milashouskas sought treatment as a member of the public, and the hospital failed to provide evidence linking the medical treatment to her employment. The court emphasized that plaintiffs must still prove their injuries were proximately caused by the alleged negligence, not the underlying accident.

Medical MalpracticeWorkers' CompensationAffirmative DefenseNegligenceHospital LiabilityEmergency TreatmentCPLRAppellate ReviewEmployment InjuryCausation
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 5,682 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