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

Sutton v. Tompkins County

Plaintiffs Douglas Sutton and Anne Serling-Sutton sued Tompkins County Department of Social Services (DSS) and its employees, alleging violations of their substantive due process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They claimed DSS improperly removed their daughter, E.S., from their custody based on unsubstantiated sexual abuse allegations. The court found that DSS conducted an extensive investigation, which included interviews with E.S. and her therapist, and had a reasonable, good-faith basis for its findings, supported by E.S.'s consistent claims of abuse. The court concluded that DSS's conduct did not "shock the conscience" and granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissing the federal civil rights claim on the merits and the state law claims without prejudice.

Child AbuseParental RightsSubstantive Due Process42 U.S.C. § 1983Qualified ImmunityFamily SeparationChild WelfareTompkins County DSSSexual Abuse AllegationsSummary Judgment
References
23
Case No. ADJ9605568
Regular
Dec 18, 2017

Ricky Sutton vs. Allen Tire Company, Security National Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed its prior decision, but amended the findings of fact. The Board found that the applicant, Ricky Sutton, sustained an industrial injury to his brain and cardiovascular system on September 13, 2013. This finding was based on the opinion of Dr. Stewart, which was deemed substantial evidence despite potential inconsistencies with other medical opinions.

Petition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryBrain InjuryCardiovascular SystemSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionsWCJ ReportAMTRUST
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Reillo v. Energy Saver Insulation Corp.

Fred Sutton, a former shareholder of an employer lacking workers' compensation insurance, faced personal liability for assessments following an injured worker's claim. Sutton sought Board review of two Workers’ Compensation Law Judge decisions, filed in October 1997 and August 2000, on March 14, 2001, after becoming aware of his personal liability. The Workers’ Compensation Board denied his application, citing untimeliness as it fell outside the statutory 30-day window for review. On appeal, Sutton contended that his delay was excusable due to his medical reasons and his initial unawareness of personal liability. However, the appellate court affirmed the Board’s decision, noting that Sutton had received relevant notices and attended at least one hearing, indicating he should have been aware of potential personal liability, thereby finding no abuse of discretion in the Board's denial.

untimely applicationWorkers' Compensation Boardpersonal liabilitycorporate officerlack of insurancestatutory deadlineappellate reviewadministrative discretionWorkers' Compensation Lawshareholder liability
References
2
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 06093 [210 AD3d 417]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 01, 2022

Polonia v. 14 Sutton Tenants Corp.

Plaintiff Charles Felix Polonia was injured after tripping on a wooden plank on a sidewalk bridge at a construction site. He filed suit against 14 Sutton Tenants Corporation and Central Construction Management, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1), 241 (6), and 200, as well as common-law negligence. The Supreme Court denied Polonia's motion for summary judgment and granted the defendants' cross-motions to dismiss all causes of action against them. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the Labor Law claims were inapplicable and that Central Construction Management did not create the dangerous condition or supervise the work. The court determined that Polonia's fall was not due to a height differential or lack of fall protection as required by the cited Labor Law sections.

Construction AccidentSidewalk BridgeLabor LawSummary JudgmentFall ProtectionIndustrial CodeNegligenceSupervisory ControlPremises LiabilityAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sutton v. Village of Valley Stream, NY

Plaintiff Raymond Sutton, Jr., an employee of the Village of Valley Stream, initiated a civil rights lawsuit against the Village and individual officials, including Mayor James Darcy, Village Attorney Patrick McKenna, and Supervisor Nicholas Camarano. Sutton, Jr. alleged that he suffered adverse employment actions, such as job reassignment, suspension of driving privileges, false accusations, and salary reductions, in retaliation for his father's political activities, thereby violating his First Amendment right to intimate association and his Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process rights. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. The court partially granted and partially denied the motion, dismissing the substantive due process claims and the entire case against defendant Darcy based on qualified immunity, but allowing the First Amendment intimate association claim to proceed.

Civil RightsFirst AmendmentIntimate AssociationSubstantive Due ProcessRetaliationEmployment LawQualified ImmunityMotion to DismissFather-Son RelationshipMunicipal Liability
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Batts v. IBEX Construction, LLC

The plaintiff appealed from two Supreme Court orders that granted summary judgment to defendants Sutton Place Group, LLC and IBEX Construction, LLC, effectively dismissing the plaintiff's personal injury complaint. The plaintiff sustained injuries from a slip and fall on a staircase. The appellate court found that Sutton Place Group, LLC failed to establish a prima facie case that it was an alter ego of the plaintiff's employer, and thus was not protected by the Workers' Compensation Law. Additionally, IBEX Construction, LLC failed to prove it did not create a dangerous condition on the staircase or that its actions were not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's fall. As a result, the appellate court reversed the summary judgment orders against both defendants, allowing the plaintiff's claims to proceed. A cross-appeal filed by IBEX Construction, LLC was dismissed due to abandonment.

Personal InjurySlip and FallSummary Judgment AppealWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityAlter Ego DoctrineContractor NegligenceHazardous ConditionProximate CauseComparative FaultAppellate Dismissal
References
23
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 04678 [173 AD3d 831]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 12, 2019

Daeira v. Genting N.Y., LLC

Ricky Daeira and his wife sued Genting New York, LLC, New York Raceway Association, Inc., and D'Amato Builders & Advisors, LLC, after Ricky Daeira was injured by falling through glass flooring at a construction site, alleging negligence and Labor Law violations. D'Amato Builders & Advisors, LLC subsequently initiated a third-party action against A.F.I. Glass & Architectural Metal, Inc. The Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on liability and dismissed Labor Law claims against the defendants. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, denying summary judgment to New York Raceway Association, Inc., on the common-law negligence and contribution claims, while affirming the remainder of the order. The court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the injured plaintiff was an 'employee' under the Labor Law provisions. It also found that D'Amato Builders & Advisors, LLC, failed to establish its lack of negligence, and New York Raceway Association, Inc., presented contradictory evidence regarding its control over the worksite, precluding summary judgment on the negligence claims.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor LawSummary JudgmentCommon-Law NegligenceContributionIndemnificationThird-Party ActionAppellate ReviewWorkplace Safety
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sutton v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

Plaintiff Chantal Sutton sought a mortgage loan modification in 2012, receiving a permanent modification in October 2013 that included a balloon payment. Dissatisfied with the terms, she submitted various written requests to her mortgage servicer, Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc., regarding the modification and term extension. Plaintiff subsequently filed an action in March 2016, alleging violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA") and New York's General Business Law Section 349. The Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint. The Court granted the motion to dismiss Plaintiff's RESPA claim with prejudice, finding that Plaintiff failed to allege a viable claim under RESPA and did not identify proximately caused damages. The Court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claim under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349, dismissing it without prejudice.

Mortgage Loan ModificationReal Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)Regulation XLoan Servicing DisputesQualified Written RequestsDodd-Frank Act ImplicationsConsumer Financial Protection BureauMotion to Dismiss GrantedSupplemental Jurisdiction DeclinedNew York General Business Law
References
60
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Melchor v. Singh

The plaintiff, injured in a ladder fall while performing brickwork, sought summary judgment against general contractor Ricky & Bros. Construction, Inc. and property owner Sukhjinder Singh for violations of Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6). The Supreme Court initially denied the motion, citing factual disputes regarding the fall. However, the appellate court reversed, granting summary judgment to the plaintiff. It found that the defective and unsecured ladder, coupled with the absence of adequate safety equipment, established prima facie violations of the Labor Law and relevant Industrial Code sections. The court concluded that the defendants failed to present a triable issue of fact to counter this showing.

Ladder fallConstruction accidentLabor Law 240(1)Labor Law 241(6)Summary judgmentAppellate reviewIndustrial Code violationsDefective equipmentUnsecured ladderProximate cause
References
33
Case No. ADJ1245565 (STK 0211651), ADJ4586569 (STK 0212014)
Regular
Nov 21, 2014

RICKIE AMOS vs. KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICES, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has dismissed Rickie Amos's petition for reconsideration. This dismissal is based on the petition being both unverified and not timely filed, as detailed in the administrative law judge's report. The Board adopted and incorporated the judge's reasoning in their order. Therefore, the petition is officially dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUnverifiedTimely-filedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationDismissalApplicantDefendantsKelly Temporary Services
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 31 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