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. 2007 NY Slip Op 30531(U)
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 05, 2007

Schirmer v. Athena-Liberty Lofts, LP

This case is an appeal from an Order of the Supreme Court, New York County, regarding a personal injury action. The plaintiff, a worker at a construction site, sustained injuries, leading to the site owner, Lofts, settling the claim after being found liable under Labor Law § 240 (1). Lofts then pursued indemnity claims against lighting contractor HP and the plaintiff's employer, Burgess. The Appellate Court modified the lower court's decision, vacating the finding that Lofts' settlement amount was reasonable due to Lofts' failure to properly demonstrate reasonableness and its mischaracterization of waiver arguments by HP and Burgess. The Court also affirmed the denial of HP's motion for summary judgment, citing unresolved factual issues concerning inadequate lighting as a cause of the accident.

Personal InjuryConstruction Site AccidentSummary JudgmentIndemnity ClaimLabor Law § 240(1)Appellate DivisionThird-Party ActionSettlement ReasonablenessCross ClaimsInadequate Lighting
References
4
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 06416 [222 AD3d 1132]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 2023

Matter of Andino v. Structural Preserv. Sys.

Marvin Andino appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied his claim for benefits due to untimely written notice of injury. Andino allegedly sustained injuries in July 2019 but did not provide written notice to his employer until March 2021, long after initial medical treatment and shoulder surgery in December 2020. The Board found his reasons for delay insufficient, despite his claims of fearing job loss and not initially thinking the injury was serious. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board rationally found no sufficient reason for the untimely notice and did not abuse its discretion in disallowing the claim.

Workers' CompensationTimely NoticeNotice of InjuryExcused FailureEmployer KnowledgePrejudiceRotator Cuff TearShoulder InjurySurgical InterventionAppellate Review
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Crosby v. State

This case involves an appeal from a declaratory judgment action challenging the constitutionality of section 24 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The plaintiff argued that the statute, which limits attorney fees in workers' compensation cases, violated her rights to privacy, freedom to contract, and equal protection. The Supreme Court at Special Term granted summary judgment to the defendant, the Workers’ Compensation Board, dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the court affirmed the constitutionality of section 24, finding no violation of the plaintiff’s rights. The court reasoned that the right to privacy does not extend to attorney contracts, the freedom to contract is subject to reasonable police power limitations, and the fee limitations serve a rational legislative purpose of protecting claimants, thus satisfying equal protection requirements.

Workers' Compensation LawAttorney FeesConstitutional LawRight to PrivacyFreedom to ContractEqual ProtectionSummary JudgmentAppealPolice PowerDeclaratory Judgment
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Workers' Compensation Commission v. City of Bridge City

The Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission, its executive director, and the Subsequent Injury Fund appealed a trial court's declaratory judgment and permanent injunction. The trial court had ruled that the Texas Workers' Compensation Act's immediate payment requirement during appeals to the Appeals Panel, without reimbursement, violated constitutional property rights, access to courts, and constituted an illegal taking. The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, dissolved the injunction, and rendered judgment upholding the constitutionality of the Act. The court reasoned that municipal corporations cannot assert Article I constitutional rights against legislative acts, and that the challenged scheme was rationally related to the legitimate state interest of ensuring prompt payment to injured workers, given the robust contested-case procedures and short appeals panel timelines. The brief interim period without reimbursement was deemed a rational legislative compromise within a complex economic field.

Workers' CompensationConstitutional LawDeclaratory JudgmentPermanent InjunctionStatutory InterpretationDue ProcessTexas ConstitutionReimbursement SchemeMunicipal CorporationsIntergovernmental Risk Pool
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re S.H.

The Onondaga County Department of Social Services filed a motion requesting that reasonable efforts to reunite a child, born in August 2002 and removed from home in February 2003, with his parents were not required. The father had been convicted of a sex offense against a half-sibling, and his parental rights to another half-sibling were terminated. Both parents were found to have neglected, severely abused, and repeatedly abused the subject child. The mother admitted knowing about the sexual abuse but failed to intervene. The court found that the Department met its burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence that the parents subjected the child to aggravating circumstances and failed to demonstrate that reunification was in the child's best interests. Consequently, the motion to dispense with reunification efforts was granted.

Child NeglectSevere AbuseRepeated AbuseParental Rights TerminationSexual OffenseAggravated CircumstancesFamily Court ActSocial Services LawReunification EffortsFoster Care
References
2
Case No. ADJ7112948
Regular
Mar 30, 2017

LYLE BYNUM vs. VALLEJO TRANSIT, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award. The Board issued a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions against the defendant's attorney and insurance company for alleged bad faith actions. These actions included filing a petition for reconsideration with inaccurate and unsupported references to evidence, misrepresenting medical opinions, and asserting meritless contentions. The WCAB is considering sanctions of up to $2,000 and reasonable expenses due to these alleged violations of labor code and board rules.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10561Findings and AwardWCJBus DriverBack InjuryLeft Lower Extremity Injury
References
0
Case No. 2023-06-4955
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2024

Kean, Carma v. NAVION BKE BELLEVUE, LLC

Navion BKE Bellevue, LLC, filed a motion for partial summary judgment, contending there was no genuine issue of material fact regarding permanent impairment from Ms. Kean’s work-related injury. After a hearing, the Court granted the motion, finding no permanent impairment. However, because the parties agreed the claim was compensable, the Court ordered Navion to provide continuing reasonable and necessary medical treatment. The Court dismissed Ms. Kean's claim for permanent disability benefits with prejudice but affirmed her entitlement to future medical benefits, the need for which must be determined at the time they are requested.

Summary JudgmentPermanent ImpairmentMedical Treatment BenefitsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdmissibility of EvidenceC-32 FormsMedical Records AdmissibilityWaiver of ObjectionCompensabilityTemporary Disability Benefits
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 08, 1996

In re the Claim of Buono

This case involves an appeal from a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board concerning a claimant's eligibility for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) under the Federal Trade Act of 1974. The claimant, a technical writer at a microchip production facility, was denied TAA benefits because her role did not involve the actual physical production of chips. The Board's interpretation of the statutory language was deemed rational and reasonable. Consequently, the Appellate Division affirmed the decision, upholding the claimant's ineligibility for trade adjustment assistance.

Unemployment InsuranceTrade Adjustment AssistanceFederal Trade Act of 1974Eligibility for BenefitsTechnical WriterMicrochip ProductionStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewForeign CompetitionDenial of Benefits
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Maso v. Regan

The petitioner, an employee of the Town of Brookhaven Highway Department, sought accidental disability retirement after sustaining an injury in a parking lot following work. The Comptroller denied the application, asserting the petitioner was not "in service" at the time of the incident. The petitioner contested this decision, referencing Workers' Compensation Law interpretations. However, the court upheld the Comptroller's determination, finding it rational, reasonable, and supported by substantial evidence. It was emphasized that Workers' Compensation Board decisions do not mandate accidental disability retirement allowances.

Accidental Disability RetirementIn Service DeterminationComptroller ReviewStatutory InterpretationWorkers' Compensation DistinctionSubstantial EvidenceArticle 78 ProceedingPublic Employee InjuryParking Lot AccidentRetirement and Social Security Law
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 25, 1992

Claim of Pratt v. Pratt Plumbing & Heating

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying an employer reimbursement for wages paid to a claimant during a period of disability. The employer's request for reimbursement was deemed untimely under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 (4) (a) because it was not filed before the initial award of compensation. The employer argued that subsequent schedule awards should allow for reimbursement, but the Board maintained that the deadline was prior to the first award. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding its interpretation of the law to be rational and reasonable, upholding the requirement for timely filing of reimbursement claims.

ReimbursementWage PaymentsTemporary DisabilitySchedule LossTimelinessStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionEmployer LiabilityDisability Benefits
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 6,001 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