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. 02-14-00084-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 2014

William D. Layton v. City of Fort Worth, City of Fort Worth Employees' Retirement Fund, and Board of City of Fort Worth Employees' Retirement Fund

Appellant William D. Layton sued the City of Fort Worth and its retirement entities after his disability benefits were terminated. The trial court granted the defendants' plea to the jurisdiction, which Layton appealed. The appellate court affirmed, holding that no statute provided a right to judicial review of the Board’s order terminating disability benefits. Furthermore, Layton had no vested property right in the benefits, and his due course of law claim seeking reinstatement of benefits would improperly control the Board's discretionary decision-making, thus implicating governmental immunity.

Disability BenefitsGovernmental ImmunityPlea to JurisdictionJudicial ReviewVested Property RightsDue Course of LawMunicipal Retirement SystemAdministrative OrderDiscretionary AuthorityTexas Constitution
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Parish v. DiNapoli

Petitioner, a correction officer, was injured in April 1999 and May 2004, leading to her being placed on leave without pay. She applied for disability retirement benefits and performance of duty disability retirement benefits, both of which were denied. The Hearing Officer found the disability retirement application untimely and that the injury was not a result of a direct act of an inmate for performance of duty benefits. The Respondent adopted these findings, leading to this CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court confirmed the determination, dismissing the petition, finding the application for disability benefits untimely and agreeing that a floor waxing by an inmate does not constitute an 'act of an inmate' for performance of duty disability retirement benefits.

Disability RetirementPerformance of Duty DisabilityCorrection OfficerTimeliness of ApplicationAct of an InmateWorkers' Compensation BenefitsMedical Leave of AbsenceCPLR Article 78New York LawPublic Employees
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. New York State & Local Retirement Systems

Petitioner, a taxpayer services representative, sustained a back injury in March 1981 while lifting forms, leading to a decline in attendance and eventual termination in November 1989. She applied for accidental and ordinary disability retirement benefits, both of which were denied by the Comptroller. The accidental disability claim was denied because the incident was not deemed an 'accident' under Retirement and Security Law § 63. The ordinary disability claim was denied as untimely, having been filed approximately six months after her termination, exceeding the 90-day limit stipulated by Retirement and Social Security Law § 62. The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to the ordinary disability denial due to untimeliness and transferred the accidental disability challenge to this Court. This Court confirmed the Comptroller's determination on both counts, rejecting the petitioner's estoppel argument regarding the untimely ordinary disability application and finding substantial evidence to support the finding that the injury did not constitute an 'accident' within the meaning of the relevant law, as it resulted from ordinary employment duties without an unexpected event.

Disability Retirement BenefitsAccidental DisabilityOrdinary DisabilityUntimely ApplicationEstoppel Against GovernmentWork-Related InjuryBack InjuryDefinition of AccidentOrdinary Employment DutiesSubstantial Evidence Review
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Staley v. New York State & Local Retirement Systems

Petitioner applied for accidental and ordinary disability retirement benefits due to a back injury sustained during employment as a developmental aide. The Comptroller denied the applications, finding the injury was not an "accident" and the petitioner was not permanently incapacitated. Petitioner challenged this determination via a CPLR article 78 proceeding, raising procedural issues and disputing the findings. The court found that the petitioner received a fair hearing and that substantial evidence supported the Comptroller's determination, ultimately confirming the denial of benefits and dismissing the petition.

Disability Retirement BenefitsAccidental DisabilityOrdinary DisabilityAdministrative ReviewGovernment Employee BenefitsBack InjuryHerniated DiscMedical EvidenceSubstantial Evidence ReviewCourt Procedure
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. New York State & Local Employees Retirement System

Petitioner, a registered nurse, sought ordinary and accidental disability retirement benefits after inhaling noxious fumes at Rome City Hospital. His ordinary disability application was denied as untimely, filed beyond the 90-day post-termination period. The accidental disability claim was also rejected because his prolonged exposure to fumes was not considered a 'sudden, fortuitous mischance' or an accidental injury under Retirement and Social Security Law § 63. The court upheld the respondent's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that no accident occurred. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Disability RetirementAccidental InjuryTimely FilingCPLR Article 78Noxious FumesOrdinary DisabilityRetirement and Social Security LawRegistered NurseRome City HospitalAlbany County
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Truly v. Regan

Petitioner, employed by Brooklyn Developmental Center, sustained a lower back and left leg injury in January 1986. After a period of inactivity, she stopped working in March 1987 due to her injuries and began receiving workers' compensation benefits. In February 1988, her applications for ordinary disability retirement benefits (under Retirement and Social Security Law art 14) and article 15 disability retirement benefits (under art 15) were denied by the respondent. The ordinary disability application was denied because she was not 'in service' at the time of filing, having been terminated in May 1987. The article 15 disability application was deemed untimely, as it was filed in February 1988, beyond the three-month window from her last payroll date of March 27, 1987, and she lacked approved medical leave. The court confirmed the denial and dismissed her petition.

Disability RetirementOrdinary Disability BenefitsArticle 15 Disability BenefitsIn Service RequirementTimely FilingCPLR Article 78 ProceedingEmployment TerminationMedical LeaveNew York State Employees' Retirement SystemAlbany County
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2011

Griffin v. Town of Dewitt

Claimant, a heavy truck mechanic, sustained a back injury requiring surgery in 2009. Despite returning to work without restrictions, he felt unable to perform his duties and retired in 2010, subsequently seeking lost time benefits. The employer and its third-party administrator argued that he had voluntarily withdrawn from the labor market. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a permanent partial disability but denied benefits due to voluntary withdrawal. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, finding an involuntary retirement and awarding continuing benefits. The employer and administrator appealed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial evidence that the claimant's disability significantly contributed to his decision to retire and his ongoing wage loss, supported by his testimony and medical opinions.

Workers' CompensationInvoluntary RetirementPermanent Partial DisabilityLost Time BenefitsLabor Market WithdrawalBack InjuryDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewMedical OpinionSocial Security Benefits
References
5
Case No. Docket No. 2016-07-0889, State File No. 57742-2015
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2017

Kelly, Shameeka v. Regency Retirement Villiage

Shameeka Kelly, an employee of Regency Retirement Village, filed a request for an Expedited Hearing seeking medical and temporary disability benefits for an alleged injury to her left shoulder, low back, and neck sustained on July 26, 2016. Regency contended that the medical evidence did not establish the injury arose out of her employment and that she refused a light-duty position. The Court found that Ms. Kelly failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that her injury arose primarily out of her employment. Consequently, the Court denied her requests for further medical and temporary disability benefits, scheduling a Scheduling (Status) Hearing for October 26, 2017.

Workers Compensation ClaimExpedited HearingMedical Benefits DenialTemporary Disability BenefitsCausationPre-existing ConditionsLight Duty OfferNurse Practitioner TestimonyOrthopedic EvaluationHerniated Disc
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. New York State & Local Retirement System

Petitioner, a maintenance worker at Carthage Central School District, was injured after a ladder slid off an elevator roof while he was repairing masonry. He applied for disability retirement benefits under Retirement and Social Security Law article 15, which was initially granted by a Hearing Officer but later denied by the Comptroller. The core issue revolves around whether the incident constituted an 'accident' for disability purposes. This CPLR article 78 proceeding was initiated to review the Comptroller's determination. The court found that the slipping of the ladder or plywood was a sudden and unexpected event, constituting an accident as a matter of law. Therefore, the court annulled the Comptroller's determination and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Disability Retirement BenefitsAccidental InjuryLadder FallElevator ShaftMaintenance WorkerComptroller Decision ReviewCPLR Article 78 ProceedingWorkplace AccidentRetirement and Social Security LawJudicial Review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fernandez v. New York State & Local Retirement Systems

The petitioner, a physician, sought a recalculation of his retirement benefits, specifically challenging the Comptroller's decision to exclude compensation from 1996 to 1999. The Comptroller had determined that the petitioner was an independent contractor during this period, making his earnings ineligible for inclusion in his final average salary. The court reviewed this determination in a CPLR article 78 proceeding. Finding substantial evidence to support the Comptroller's findings, which included the county issuing 1099 tax forms, requiring specific contracts, and the absence of employee benefits, the court confirmed the determination and dismissed the petition.

retirement benefitsindependent contractorfinal average salaryComptroller determinationCPLR article 78 proceedingOrleans County1099 tax formsW-2 wage statementsemployer-employee relationshippension recalculation
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 10,833 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