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. ADJ1034130 (SAC 0249097)
Regular
Nov 04, 2014

RUSSELL CALDWELL vs. ROY E. LAY TRUCKING, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Russell Caldwell concerning a workers' compensation claim against Roy E. Lay Trucking. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the petition and the administrative law judge's (WCJ) report. Adopting the WCJ's report and recommendation, the WCAB dismissed Caldwell's petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardReport and RecommendationAdministrative Law JudgeDismissedRoy E. Lay TruckingSedgwick CMSADJ1034130SAC 0249097Russell Caldwell
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Russell v. Chase Bank USA, NA (In Re Russell)

Nigel Anthony Russell initiated an adversary proceeding against Chase Bank USA, N.A., alleging violations of a bankruptcy discharge injunction and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, along with a claim for defamation. Russell contended that Chase intentionally failed to update his credit reports to reflect a discharged debt, thereby attempting to coerce payment. Chase filed a motion to dismiss all claims. The court granted the motion to dismiss the defamation claim due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding it not "related to" the bankruptcy estate. However, the court denied the motion to dismiss the discharge injunction violation claim, ruling that a deliberate refusal to correct credit information could be considered an act to collect a discharged debt, and further noted that punitive damages might be warranted if willful misconduct is proven.

BankruptcyDischarge InjunctionCredit ReportFair Credit Reporting ActDefamationMotion to DismissPunitive DamagesCivil ContemptChapter 7Debt Collection
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 05, 1997

In re Russell B.

Respondent David B. was charged with sexual abuse of his son Russell, leading to a proceeding under Family Court Act article 10 by the petitioner. Evidence included Russell's detailed statements of abuse and David B.'s guilty plea to sexual abuse in the second degree. Family Court adjudicated Russell as sexually abused and found derivative neglect for his sisters, Kayla and Brittany. David B. appealed, challenging the sufficiency of evidence, but the appellate court affirmed the decision. The court found Russell's statements sufficiently corroborated by David B.'s conviction.

Sexual abuseChild neglectFamily CourtCorroborationPlea of guiltyDerivative findingsFamily Court Act Article 10Penal LawAppellate DivisionChild testimony
References
3
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 02162
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 2023

Matter of Ryba v. Russell

Claimant Paul Ryba filed for workers' compensation benefits after falling off a roof while working for Buczkowski Builders LLC, a subcontractor of Ryan E. Russell, doing business as Ryan's Home Improvements (RHI). Neither Buczkowski nor RHI had workers' compensation insurance. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found Buczkowski to be the employer but held RHI liable under Workers' Compensation Law § 56 due to lack of insurance. RHI appealed to the Workers' Compensation Board, arguing § 56 was inapplicable to uninsured general contractors. The Board denied RHI's application for review, finding it incomplete for failing to fully answer question 13 on the RB-89 application. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying review due to RHI's non-compliance with the application requirements, and thus, the merits of RHI's appeal were not considered.

Uninsured EmployerGeneral Contractor LiabilityAppellate ReviewAdministrative ProcedureProcedural Non-ComplianceApplication for Review DenialStatutory InterpretationThird DepartmentRB-89 ApplicationSubcontractor Liability
References
6
Case No. 154970/19 | Appeal No. 5599 | Case No. 2024-06451
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 15, 2026

Russell v. Lenox Hill Hosp.

Plaintiff James Russell, an employee of a delivery service, sustained injuries while unloading a blood irradiator machine at Lenox Hill Hospital, falling off a truck after the machine rolled towards him. The Supreme Court had denied Lenox Hill Hospital's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 200 claims and common-law negligence, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) liability, and denied Rad Source Technologies' motion to dismiss the third-party complaint. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed these decisions, dismissing both the complaint against Lenox Hill Hospital and the third-party complaint. The court ruled that plaintiff was not a covered worker under Labor Law § 240(1) as the electrical work was unrelated to his activity and completed before delivery. Furthermore, Lenox Hill Hospital did not supervise or control plaintiff's work, negating Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence liability. The third-party complaint was also dismissed, as Rad Source cannot be held liable for the negligence of an independent contractor, and delivery work is not considered inherently dangerous.

Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 200Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewConstruction AccidentIndependent ContractorDelivery ServicesPremises LiabilityLoading Dock InjuryUnloading Equipment
References
7
Case No. ADJ10275361
Regular
Jan 27, 2020

RUSSELL MCFADDEN (deceased); RENEE MCFADDEN, JAZMINE MCFADDEN, and RUSSELL MCFADDEN, II vs. KEOLIS TRANSIT AMERICA; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a judge's decision denying a death benefit claim for Russell McFadden, who died by suicide. The applicant contended his death resulted from an industrial psychiatric injury due to occupational stress. Medical evidence indicated that industrial factors were only a 35% cause of the decedent's psychiatric disorder, with significant pre-existing conditions and drug use being the predominant causes. Furthermore, the Board found no evidence that the suicide was an irresistible impulse, distinguishing it from cases where an industrial injury directly causes a mental condition that prevents resistance to suicide. Therefore, the claim was denied based on the psychiatric injury not being predominantly industrially caused and the suicide not meeting the criteria for compensability.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRenee McFaddenKeolis Transit AmericaLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyADJ10275361Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationIndustrial Psychiatric InjuryOccupational Stress and StrainCompensable Death ClaimLabor Code Section 3600(a)(6)
References
6
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 09251
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 24, 2019

Cioffi v. S.M. Foods, Inc.

This case involves an appeal regarding a personal injury action stemming from a police officer, Frederick M. Cioffi, being struck by a tractor-trailer operated by Daniel Burke during a traffic stop. The plaintiffs, Cioffi and his wife, alleged negligence and violations of General Municipal Law § 205-e against multiple defendants. The appellate court reviewed several aspects, including summary judgment on Burke's liability, vicarious liability claims against Russell McCall's, Inc. and Doug Jay, and the application of the Graves Amendment to Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. and PLM Trailer Leasing. Additionally, the court examined whether the injured plaintiff suffered a 'grave injury' under Workers' Compensation Law § 11 and the standard of care applicable to Officer Pinto's vehicle parking during a non-emergency operation. The court modified the lower court's order by granting plaintiffs' summary judgment on Burke's liability, denying dismissal of a cause of action against Russell McCall's Inc., and dismissing part of the third-party complaint regarding Pinto's parking.

Police Officer InjuryTraffic AccidentVehicle NegligenceVicarious LiabilityGraves AmendmentWorkers' Compensation LawGrave InjuryEmergency VehicleSummary JudgmentComparative Fault
References
53
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2016

Oliphant v. Caldwell

Plaintiff William Oliphant, an African American man, brought a Section 1983 action against Anne Caldwell and David Jolly, alleging he was denied equal protection through a failure to promote him at the Orange County Department of Social Services in 2011 and 2012. Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for their promotion decisions. The court denied the motion, finding that a reasonable jury could infer racial discrimination as a motivating factor due to evidence such as racial disparities in supervisory positions, Oliphant's superior qualifications, and potential pretext in the defendants' explanations.

Employment DiscriminationSection 1983Equal ProtectionSummary JudgmentRacial DiscriminationPromotion DenialCivil Service LawDisparate TreatmentMcDonnell Douglas FrameworkFederal Court
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 1974

Russell v. Dumpson

Petitioner (Mrs. Russell) initiated an Article 78 proceeding to challenge a May 9, 1974 decision by the New York State Department of Social Services, which affirmed the denial of retroactive public assistance by the New York City Department of Social Services. The petitioner and her husband had taken two children, Harry and Kennedy Drayton, into their home based on assurances from a social services employee that assistance would be provided. Despite filing an application and making numerous inquiries, assistance for the period the children resided with them was denied, and only later partially granted for one child. The respondents denied retroactive assistance, citing regulations that assistance meets current needs and the petitioner's alleged failure to request a fair hearing within 60 days. The court found errors of law in the respondents' decision, ruling that the Department could not penalize the petitioners for its own inaction and that the 60-day period did not commence without written notification. Consequently, the court annulled the decision and directed respondents to issue a retroactive grant of assistance to the petitioner.

Public AssistanceRetroactive GrantArticle 78 ProceedingSocial Services LawFair HearingAdministrative ReviewDue ProcessAgency InactionChildren's WelfareState Regulations
References
6
Case No. No. 37
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2024

Suzan Russell v. New York University

Plaintiff, an adjunct professor at NYU, was subjected to offensive conduct by colleagues and subsequently sued them and her employer in federal court, alleging violations of federal, New York State, and New York City statutes, along with intentional infliction of emotional distress. The federal court granted summary judgment to the defendants on the federal claims and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the state and city claims, a decision upheld by the Second Circuit. Plaintiff then initiated a nearly identical suit in state Supreme Court, Bronx County, which dismissed her complaint based on collateral estoppel and failure to state a claim. The Appellate Division affirmed this dismissal, and the Court of Appeals now affirms, holding that collateral estoppel bars plaintiff's claims and that the City Human Rights Law does not permit individual coworker liability without a supervisory role.

Collateral EstoppelHostile Work EnvironmentDiscrimination LawRetaliation ClaimsSummary JudgmentNew York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL)New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL)Individual Employee LiabilityFederal Court JurisdictionAppellate Review
References
88
Showing 1-10 of 80 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