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. 2018 NY Slip Op 08980
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 27, 2018

Matter of Ricci v. Maria Regina Residence

This case involves an appeal by the Special Disability Fund from a Workers' Compensation Board decision. The Board had ruled that the workers' compensation carrier for Maria Regina Residence was entitled to reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund for a claim related to Cyndia Ricci's work-related knee injury, asserting Ricci had pre-existing heart and arthritis conditions. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found that the record lacked substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that Ricci's preexisting conditions hindered her employment potential. The court concluded that the medical opinion relied upon was based on generalities and speculation, and that conditions controlled by medication do not, without more, constitute a hindrance to employability. Consequently, the Board's decision was reversed, and the matter was remitted for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationSpecial Disability FundReimbursement ClaimPreexisting ImpairmentEmployabilityMaterially and Substantially Greater DisabilityMedical OpinionOrthopedic SurgeonAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Informal Opinion No.

The opinion addresses whether Rockland County can mandate that 50% of public works project hires be county residents. It analyzes various constitutional clauses, finding the Commerce Clause not an impediment due to the 'market participant' doctrine and congressional authorization for federal funds. It distinguishes a local law from a state law concerning the Privileges and Immunities Clause, suggesting a local law targeting non-county residents (including other state residents) might be valid. The opinion also examines the Equal Protection Clause and bona fide residency requirements, concluding they generally pass the rational basis test. However, it cautions that such a local law must not violate General Municipal Law § 103 competitive bidding requirements, which would be a factual determination on a case-by-case basis.

Public Works ProjectsResident Hiring RequirementsLocal Law AuthorizationCommerce ClausePrivileges and Immunities ClauseEqual Protection ClauseCompetitive BiddingGeneral Municipal LawHome Rule LawMarket Participant Doctrine
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Szucs v. Committee of Interns and Residents

Paul Szucs, a physician at Bronx Municipal Hospital Center (BMHC), sued the Committee of Interns and Residents (CIR), a labor union, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a conspiracy with BMHC to deny his collective bargaining rights and force his resignation. He also brought several state law claims. Szucs claimed CIR representatives conspired with BMHC to frustrate his grievance and arbitration attempts after he was fired from his residency program for alleged attendance issues. The court granted CIR's motion for summary judgment on the § 1983 claim, finding no evidence of a conspiracy between CIR and BMHC, and no evidence that CIR acted under color of state law or had a policy to conspire. The court dismissed the federal claim and remanded the remaining New York State common law claims for breach of contract, breach of duty of fair representation, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and concerted action to state court. The court reserved decision on motions for attorneys' fees and costs, referring them to a Magistrate Judge.

Civil RightsSection 1983Labor LawCollective Bargaining AgreementDue ProcessConspiracySummary JudgmentState Law ClaimsRemandAttorneys' Fees
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Committee of Interns & Residents v. New York State Labor Relations Board

The Committee of Interns and Residents (petitioner) initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to compel the New York State Labor Relations Board (respondent) to assert jurisdiction over unfair labor practice complaints against several intervening nonprofit hospitals. The State Board had previously dismissed the petitions, expressing uncertainty about its jurisdiction following 1974 amendments to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) which brought nonprofit hospitals under federal purview. However, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) subsequently determined that interns, residents, and clinical fellows, represented by the petitioner, are 'students' and not 'employees' under the NLRA, thereby declining federal jurisdiction over them. This court concluded that the NLRB's decision to not assert jurisdiction over these personnel meant that the NLRA did not preempt the State Board's historical jurisdiction in such matters. Consequently, the court granted the petition, vacated the State Board's dismissals, and remanded the cases for further consideration consistent with this opinion.

Labor LawNational Labor Relations ActFederal PreemptionState Labor Relations BoardNLRB JurisdictionInterns and ResidentsCollective BargainingNonprofit HospitalsEmployee StatusStudent Status
References
6
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 04184 [150 AD3d 1589]
Regular Panel Decision
May 25, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Board v. Program Risk Management, Inc.

The New York State Workers' Compensation Board, acting as administrator and successor to the Community Residence Insurance Savings Plan, initiated legal action against various entities and individuals after the trust became severely underfunded. Defendants include Program Risk Management, Inc. (administrator), PRM Claims Services, Inc. (claims administrator), individual officers of PRM, the Board of Trustees, and Thomas Gosdeck (trust counsel). The plaintiff sought damages for claims such as breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and legal malpractice. The Supreme Court's order partially dismissed some claims and denied others. On cross-appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, modified the Supreme Court's order, notably reversing the dismissal of several breach of fiduciary duty claims and common-law indemnification against PRMCS, while affirming denials of motions to dismiss breach of contract, legal malpractice, and unjust enrichment claims. The court's decision was influenced by recent rulings in State of N.Y. Workers' Compensation Bd. v Wang.

Workers' Compensation LawGroup Self-Insured TrustBreach of ContractBreach of Fiduciary DutyLegal MalpracticeUnjust EnrichmentStatute of LimitationsEquitable EstoppelAlter Ego LiabilityCommon-Law Indemnification
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gedon v. University Medical Residents Services, P. C.

The claimant appealed a decision by the Workers’ Compensation Board denying death benefits for her deceased husband, an anesthesiology resident who died from a sufentanil overdose. The Board had ruled that his death did not arise out of and in the course of his employment. The claimant argued that the decedent's addiction was work-related due to job stress and access to narcotic drugs. However, the court affirmed the Board’s decision, finding no substantial medical evidence to specifically link the decedent's drug addiction and subsequent death to the conditions of his employment. The court noted the lack of a clear diagnosis and treating physician testimony to support the claim.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsSubstance AbuseAnesthesiologyOccupational DiseaseMedical ResidencyCausationEmployment-Related InjuryDrug OverdoseAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. 12 Civ. 8456
Regular Panel Decision

Residents for Sane Trash Solutions, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

Plaintiffs, including Residents for Sane Trash Solutions, Inc. and Micah Z. Kellner, challenged the construction of the 91st Street Marine Transfer Station (MTS) in New York City. They alleged that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) improperly issued a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit by failing to conduct an adequate environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), consider alternatives, or sufficiently address impacts after Superstorm Sandy. Additionally, Plaintiffs claimed the City of New York and its Department of Sanitation denied them equal protection, and Asphalt Green Inc. alleged breach of contract, trespass, and private nuisance. The District Court granted summary judgment to the Defendants, affirming that the Corps’ permit issuance was rational, its environmental review was adequate, and its considerations of alternatives, mitigation, and post-Sandy impacts were sufficient. All of Plaintiffs' claims, including constitutional and state law claims, were dismissed with prejudice.

Environmental LawClean Water Act (CWA)National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)Waste ManagementMarine Transfer StationJudicial ReviewAdministrative Procedure Act (APA)Summary JudgmentFlood RiskSuperstorm Sandy
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2006

Stevenson v. Town of Oyster Bay

The plaintiffs, professional clam-diggers George Stevenson, Terrance Stevenson, and Richard Schenna, brought an action against the Town of Oyster Bay and various individual defendants for alleged violations of the Fourteenth Amendment under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3), and 1988. The plaintiffs challenged the Town's one-year residency requirement for clamming licenses as unconstitutional, arguing it discriminated against non-Town residents and violated their fundamental right to travel under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiffs never established residency and that the Town Clerk had discretion to deny permits. The Court determined that the plaintiffs, being New York State residents but not residents of the specific Town of Oyster Bay for the required duration, lacked standing to challenge a local ordinance under the Privileges and Immunities Clause because that clause only applies to "out-of-state" residents. Consequently, the Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the amended complaint.

Residency RequirementClamming LicensesEqual Protection ClausePrivileges and Immunities ClauseRight to TravelSummary JudgmentStanding LawMunicipal LawConstitutional LawFederal Court
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anderberg v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

The petitioners, residents along Clove Road, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding against the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and Ulster County Department of Public Works (Ulster County). The proceeding challenged DEC's decision to issue a stream disturbance permit for the replacement of a bridge on Clove Road, arguing that the project required a full State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) review, including an environmental assessment form (EAF). DEC and Ulster County classified the project as a Type II action, asserting it was a "replacement in kind" and thus exempt from comprehensive SEQRA review. The court found that the respondents had adequately considered environmental factors and that their classification of the project was not arbitrary or capricious. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, ruling that no further SEQRA review was necessary. Additionally, the court denied the petitioners' motion for a default judgment against the Town of Gardiner concerning two other bridges, deeming the request premature.

Environmental LawSEQRA ComplianceBridge ConstructionAdministrative ReviewType II ActionStream Disturbance PermitPublic Works ProjectJudicial ScrutinyUlster CountyNew York State DEC
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'Connor v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre

The plaintiff appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, which granted the defendant’s motion to transfer a personal injury action from Bronx County to Nassau County. The plaintiff had initially placed venue in Bronx County based on his alleged residence at the time of commencement in December 1994. However, discovery revealed that Workers’ Compensation documents indicated the plaintiff had changed his address to Suffern, Rockland County, in July 1994, meaning he did not reside in Bronx County when the action was commenced. The defendant subsequently moved to transfer the action, citing the plaintiff's true residence and the inconvenience to material witnesses of a trial in Bronx County. The appellate court affirmed the order, concluding that the plaintiff resided in Rockland County at the time the action commenced and that the defendant had promptly moved to change venue after ascertaining the plaintiff’s actual residence.

Personal InjuryVenue TransferChange of VenueAppellate ReviewCPLRResidence DisputeWorkers' Compensation DocumentsNassau County Supreme CourtBronx CountyRockland County
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 483 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