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. 2022 NY Slip Op 04941 [208 AD3d 412]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 16, 2022

Ruisech v. Structure Tone Inc.

This personal injury action arises from a construction site accident where plaintiff, an A-Val Architectural Metal III, LLC employee, slipped on pebbles. The Appellate Division, First Department, reviewed the Supreme Court's order. The appellate court modified the lower court's decision, granting summary judgment to several defendants (Park, CBRE, and Structure Tone Inc.) on claims related to Labor Law §§ 241(6) and 200, and common-law negligence. The court determined that the Industrial Code regulations cited were inapplicable and that the defendants lacked supervisory control over the injury-producing work. Additionally, the court ruled on various contractual indemnification claims, finding certain indemnification clauses enforceable while others were not due to ambiguity or lack of negligence.

Construction AccidentLabor LawIndustrial CodeSummary JudgmentIndemnificationContractual IndemnificationCommon Law NegligenceWorkers' Compensation LawPersonal InjuryAppellate Review
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bardouille v. Structure-Tone, Inc.

Thomas Bardouille and his wife appealed orders from the Supreme Court, Kings County, after Thomas was injured in an electrical explosion. The initial Supreme Court decision had granted summary judgment dismissing their complaint, which alleged violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241(6) and common-law negligence against various defendants including building owners, managing agents, and contractors. The appellate court modified the initial order, finding triable issues of fact concerning direction and control and the applicability of Industrial Code regulation 12 NYCRR 23-1.13(b)(4), thereby reinstating certain claims against Structure-Tone, Inc., Deutsche Bank, Tishman Speyer Trammell Crow Limited Partnership, and Tishman Speyer Properties, Inc. The appeal also addressed a third-party action against Bardouille's employer, Ohm Electric, partially dismissing contribution and indemnification claims under Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 due to the absence of "grave injury" but affirming contractual claims. The appeal from an order denying reargument was dismissed, and the initial order was modified and affirmed in part.

Personal injuryLabor Lawsummary judgmentnegligenceappellate reviewconstruction accidentelectrical explosionindemnificationcontributiontriable issue of fact
References
4
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02518
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 19, 2022

Peters v. Structure Tone, Inc.

Plaintiff Nedroy Peters, a carpenter, suffered an eye injury from falling concrete debris while working on a construction site managed by Structure Tone, Inc. and owned by MI NY Clock Tower, LLC. He filed claims under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The Supreme Court initially granted plaintiff summary judgment on liability, but the Appellate Division, First Department, modified this. The Appellate Division denied plaintiff's summary judgment motion, finding unresolved issues of fact concerning the application of Labor Law § 240 (1) regarding elevation differential and debris force, and for Labor Law § 241 (6) regarding normal exposure to falling objects and the reasonableness of protective coverings. Therefore, the case will proceed further to resolve these factual disputes.

Construction AccidentFalling DebrisLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Industrial Code ViolationsSummary JudgmentElevation DifferentialEye InjuryRetinal DetachmentWorker Safety
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp. v. Golf 600 Inc.

Plaintiff Slep-Tone Entertainment Corporation, a manufacturer of karaoke tracks under the "Sound Choice" brand, filed a trademark infringement action against Clontarfscouse LLC, which operates "The River Roadhouse" bar. Clontarfscouse hired Nightstar DJ and Karaoke, which used Slep-Tone's trademarked products without a license. Slep-Tone warned Clontarfscouse about the infringement, but the defendant continued to host Nightstar's events. The court applied the Inwood test for contributory trademark infringement to Clontarfscouse as a service provider with sufficient control over the infringing conduct and knowledge of the specific infringement. Finding that Nightstar infringed Slep-Tone's trademarks and that Clontarfscouse was contributorily liable, the court granted Slep-Tone's motion for summary judgment on liability for federal trademark infringement and unfair competition.

Trademark InfringementUnfair CompetitionSummary JudgmentContributory LiabilityKaraoke TracksSound ChoiceService Provider LiabilityWillful BlindnessIntellectual PropertyFederal Law
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Aloi v. Structure-Tone, Inc.

Joseph Aloi, an iron worker, sustained a back injury at a construction site while manually lowering a bucket of steel bolts with a rope. He and his wife subsequently commenced an action against Structure-Tone, Inc., the general contractor, and Starlex, LLC, the property owner, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), and common-law negligence. The Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint. The appellate court affirmed this decision, finding the accident did not fall under Labor Law § 240 (1) as it was not an elevation-related hazard. Furthermore, Labor Law § 241 (6) was deemed inapplicable due to the absence of mechanical hoisting devices. The Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims were dismissed as there was no evidence that the defendants supervised or controlled the injured plaintiff's work.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentSummary JudgmentLabor Law § 200Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Common-Law NegligenceElevation-Related HazardHoisting DevicesWorkplace Safety
References
13
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02026
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2025

Structure Tone, Inc. v. Merchants Preferred Ins. Co.

The Supreme Court properly denied Old Republic's motion for summary judgment due to unresolved questions of fact concerning whether the negligence of its named insured, Port Morris Tile & Marble Corp., was a proximate cause of an underlying accident, which would trigger indemnification by Old Republic. Evidence suggests factual disputes regarding Port Morris's responsibility for ensuring proper lighting and safety for its employees. The court also correctly granted Scottsdale's cross-motion for summary judgment. It found that Old Republic, as the primary insurer with an 'other insurance' provision, is not entitled to contribution from Scottsdale, whose policy contains an 'excess' clause, until Old Republic's coverage has been fully exhausted. The doctrine of collateral estoppel was deemed inapplicable because prior dismissals were not based on findings regarding Port Morris's negligence.

Insurance LawContractual IndemnificationDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyOther Insurance ClauseExcess ClauseSummary JudgmentProximate CauseNegligenceRespondeat Superior
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 23, 2008

AIU Insurance v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

The case involves a dispute between two insurers regarding their respective coverage obligations for a mutual insured in an underlying action following a fatal construction site accident. Plaintiff, who insured both the site owner and the subcontractor, sought reimbursement from defendant, who also insured the employer under a workers’ compensation policy, for half of a settlement paid in the underlying action. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to plaintiff, obligating defendant to reimburse plaintiff. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, vacating the judgment and granting summary judgment to defendant. The appellate court ruled that the antisubrogation rule would have compelled the dismissal of any third-party action, thereby precluding plaintiff from obtaining reimbursement from a coinsurer.

Insurance CoverageSubrogationSummary JudgmentWorkers' CompensationConstruction AccidentFatal AccidentCoinsuranceAppellate ReversalUnderlying ActionThird-Party Action
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2002

People v. Fernandez

The defendant was convicted of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree after a jury trial in Bionx County. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment and concurrent sentences of six years and one year, respectively. The verdict was upheld against the weight of the evidence, as the jury properly rejected the defendant's justification defense, finding his use of force unjustified despite the complainant reaching for the knife first. The court noted that the defendant inflicted severe injuries while remaining uninjured and was still advancing with a knife on the unarmed, retreating complainant when police arrived. Additionally, the court properly redacted a reference to past drug use from the complainant's medical triage sheet due to a lack of proper foundation and irrelevance to treatment. The defendant's ability to cross-examine on the complainant's drug use at the time of the incident was not precluded.

Criminal LawAssault Second DegreeCriminal Possession of a WeaponJustification DefenseSelf-DefenseWeight of EvidenceCredibility DeterminationMedical Records RedactionHearsay RuleCross-Examination
References
2
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 04811 [208 AD3d 492]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 03, 2022

Murphy v. 80 Pine, LLC

Daniel Murphy, an employee of Empire Office, Inc., sustained a knee injury after tripping over an electrical conduit ('stub up') at a worksite owned by 80 Pine, LLC, and managed by Rudin Management Co., Inc. He and his spouse filed a consolidated action alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241(6) against the owners, general contractor Structure Tone, Inc., and various electrical contractors including United States Information Systems, Inc. (Systems), USIS Electric, Inc. (Electric), and Bigman Brothers, Inc. (Bigman). The defendants moved for summary judgment. The Supreme Court, Kings County, largely denied these motions. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, granting summary judgment to Systems on Labor Law § 200, common-law negligence, and certain Labor Law § 241(6) claims, and dismissing Bigman's cross-claims against Systems. It also granted summary judgment to Electric for the Labor Law § 241(6) claim predicated on 12 NYCRR 23-1.30, and to the owners and Structure Tone for Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims. However, it affirmed the denial of summary judgment for Electric regarding Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence, and for the owners and Structure Tone regarding specific Labor Law § 241(6) claims. The court also affirmed the denial of Electric's motion to dismiss Systems' cross-claim for contractual indemnification and the denial of the owners' and Structure Tone's motion for contractual indemnification against Bigman.

Construction AccidentLabor LawSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityCommon-Law NegligenceHazardous ConditionElectrical ConduitWorkplace SafetyAppellate ReviewIndemnification
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tabickman v. Batchelder Street Condominiums By the Bay, LLC

This case involves a consolidated personal injury action where a plaintiff was injured after falling from a makeshift platform at a construction site. The plaintiff sued Deb-Tone General Contracting Corp. for negligence, and Batchelder Street Condominiums By the Bay, LLC, Batchelder Street Development Corp., and I & J Building & Contracting Corp. for violations of Labor Law § 240 (1). Deb-Tone appealed the denial of its motion for summary judgment, which was affirmed. The plaintiff cross-appealed the denial of his motion for summary judgment against the Batchelder entities on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability, which was granted. The court found Deb-Tone could be liable as a subcontractor for creating the hazardous condition and that Batchelder failed to rebut the plaintiff's prima facie case under Labor Law § 240 (1).

Personal InjuryLabor LawSummary JudgmentNegligenceSubcontractor LiabilityPremises LiabilityConstruction AccidentFall from HeightMakeshift PlatformAppellate Review
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 272 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