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
Mar 04, 1988

In re Nurse Care Registry, Inc.

Nurse Care Registry, Inc., an agency providing health care personnel, appealed a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that classified its workers as employees rather than independent contractors, making Nurse Care liable for unemployment insurance contributions. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence of Nurse Care's control over key aspects of the services provided by the workers. This control included client contact, worker wages, and billing/collection, which were deemed indicative of an employer-employee relationship. The court relied on precedent establishing that such control warrants an employment finding, despite workers having full-time positions elsewhere and the agency not directly supervising daily work.

unemployment insuranceemployer-employee relationshipindependent contractoradministrative lawappellate reviewlabor lawagency staffingcontrol testsubstantial evidencehealth care industry
References
4
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 03114 [171 AD3d 1410]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2019

Matter of Harry's Nurses Registry, Inc. (Commissioner of Labor)

Harry's Nurses Registry, Inc. (HNR), a staffing agency, appealed a decision from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board had assessed HNR for additional unemployment insurance contributions for health care workers for the years 2008-2010, reversing an Administrative Law Judge's decision. HNR's main contention on appeal was that the Board was bound by a prior unappealed Administrative Law Judge decision from 1999, which had found HNR's health care workers to be independent contractors for an earlier audit period. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, stating that the Board is not bound by prior unappealed Administrative Law Judge decisions, especially when covering different audit periods and presenting additional factors of control.

Unemployment InsuranceStaffing AgencyHealth Care WorkersIndependent Contractor StatusEmployee StatusUnemployment Insurance Appeal BoardAdministrative Law Judge DecisionStare DecisisAudit PeriodAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. Proof of Claim No. 149
Regular Panel Decision

In re DeWitt Rehabilitation & Nursing Center, Inc.

The Debtor, DeWitt Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, Inc., moved to expunge the priority portion of a claim filed by United Staffing Registry, Inc. The Claimant sought priority status for social security, Medicare, and unemployment payments made for temporary employees it provided, citing 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(5). Bankruptcy Judge Allan L. Gropper analyzed the application of § 507(a)(5) in light of case precedents, including Howard Delivery Service, Inc. The Court determined that the priority under § 507(a)(5) is intended to protect contributions for a debtor's direct employees, and the temporary employees were not employees of DeWitt. Consequently, the Debtor's objection was sustained, disallowing the priority and reclassifying the entire claim as a general unsecured claim, while also denying the Debtor's request for legal fees.

Bankruptcy LawPriority ClaimsEmployee Benefit Plans11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(5)Temporary EmployeesUnsecured ClaimsIndemnificationLegal FeesClaim ExpungementStatutory Interpretation
References
9
Case No. 2014 NY Slip Op 07517
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 05, 2014

People v. Dorvilier

The defendants, Harry Dorvilier and Harry's Nurses Registry, Inc., appealed judgments from the Supreme Court, Queens County, convicting them of multiple counts of grand larceny. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed both judgments. The court found the defendants' contention regarding a repugnant verdict to be unpreserved for review and without merit. The Supreme Court's decision to allow an expert witness to testify on Workers' Compensation Law requirements was upheld as a provident exercise of discretion. A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was noted to be a "mixed claim" that cannot be resolved on the record and thus requires a CPL 440.10 proceeding.

Grand LarcenyAppellate ReviewJury VerdictExpert Witness TestimonyWorkers' Compensation LawIneffective Assistance of CounselRepugnant VerdictCriminal LawAppealsEvidence Admissibility
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Abramson v. Long Beach Memorial Hospital

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision that found a nursing assistant to be a general employee of Nassau Registry, Inc., and a special employee of Long Beach Memorial Hospital. The claimant sustained disabling lower back injuries after slipping on a wet hospital floor while working at the hospital, having been assigned by the Registry. The Board apportioned the workers' compensation awards equally between both employers. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding of a dual employer-employee relationship. Key factors considered included the right to control, method of payment, and the integral nature of the claimant's work for both the employment agency and the hospital.

General EmploymentSpecial EmploymentEmployer-Employee RelationshipWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceRight to ControlMethod of PaymentDual EmploymentEmployment Agency
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 2012

Compensation Guidance Services, Inc. v. Harry's Nurses Registry, Inc.

In this breach of contract action, the plaintiff agreed to review the defendant's Workers' Compensation insurance policy to secure refunds. The plaintiff's services led to a reclassification of class codes, resulting in a $53,797 refund and credit for the defendant. Pursuant to their agreement, the plaintiff invoiced the defendant for 50% of this amount. Upon the defendant's failure to pay, the plaintiff commenced legal action. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and this decision was subsequently affirmed on appeal, including the adherence to the original determination upon reargument.

Breach of ContractSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation InsuranceInsurance PremiumsRefundsClass Codes ReclassificationAppealAffirmed JudgmentReargumentContractual Agreement
References
4
Case No. ADJ1965889
Regular
Oct 24, 2014

VELDA McQUEEN vs. VICTOR VALLEY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, THE REGISTRY NETWORK, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision holding CIGA responsible for applicant's 2000 injury benefits. CIGA argued the WCJ failed to fully develop the record, address the "other insurance" issue, and explain her decision. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding CIGA's arguments regarding the "other insurance" issue had merit. Consequently, the WCJ's decision was rescinded, and the case was returned to the trial level for further development of the record and a new decision.

California Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAliquidationother insurancePetition for Reconsiderationrescinded decisionreturned to trial levelspecific injurycumulative traumaCompromise and Release
References
2
Case No. ADJ9290124
Regular
Aug 01, 2014

TONIE RUIZ vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES IHSS, Legally Uninsured, Administered By YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

The defendant sought reconsideration of an award of temporary disability benefits for an IHSS caregiver injured in 2012. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the award of temporary disability benefits. However, the Board clarified that benefits are limited to 104 weeks under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2). The Board also ruled that placing the applicant on a registry did not constitute a valid offer of modified work, as no actual offer was made.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIn-Home Supportive ServicesIHSSDual EmploymentTemporary DisabilityLabor Code 4656(c)(2)Permanent and StationaryPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorPQMEAgreed Medical Examiner
References
3
Case No. 02 CV 7106(RPP)
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2003

In Re Millenium Seacarriers, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal by Assuranceforeningen Skuld (Skuld) from a Bankruptcy Court order. Skuld sought to establish a priority maritime lien for unpaid insurance premiums against vessels of Millenium Seacarriers, Inc., which was in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The Bankruptcy Court denied Skuld's motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment to the Foreign Mortgagees (Allfirst Bank and Wayland Investment Funds, L.L.C.), ruling that Norwegian law, stipulated in Skuld's insurance contract, did not recognize such a lien. The District Court affirmed this decision, holding that federal choice of law principles dictate the enforcement of the choice of law provision in the international insurance agreement, leading to the application of Norwegian law where no such maritime lien exists.

Maritime LawChoice of LawForum Selection ClauseInternational ContractBankruptcy AppealSummary JudgmentAdmiralty LawShip MortgagePreferred Maritime LienInsurance Premiums
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Yelle v. Woodworth's Painting Co.

The Workers' Compensation Board found that a house painter, considered an "outside employee," died in the course of his employment while commuting home, awarding death benefits. The employer and carrier appealed, arguing the Board's decision conflicted with a recent ruling in Matter of Wills v Christian Nursing Registry, which remitted a similar case. The Appellate Court, citing the principle from Matter of Field Delivery Serv. [Roberts] that administrative agencies must provide a rational explanation for inconsistent decisions, concluded that the Board failed to do so regarding its application of the "outside-employee rule." Consequently, the Court reversed the Board's decision and remitted the matter for further proceedings, mandating a rational explanation for the apparent conflict.

Workers' CompensationOutside Employee RuleCourse of EmploymentAutomobile AccidentDeath BenefitsAppellate ReviewAdministrative LawAgency PrecedentStare DecisisRational Explanation Requirement
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 14 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