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

Ryan v. New York Telephone Co.

Edward C. Ryan was terminated by New York Telephone Company (Telco) for alleged theft, leading to criminal charges and denial of unemployment benefits. While criminal charges were dropped and the unemployment benefits denial was upheld, Ryan sued Telco for false arrest, malicious prosecution, slander, and wrongful discharge. His wife, Darlene Ryan, also claimed related injuries. Special Term denied Telco's summary judgment motion and struck its res judicata and collateral estoppel defenses. This dissenting opinion argues that the administrative finding of Ryan's misconduct should preclude relitigation under res judicata and collateral estoppel, thus the Special Term's order should be reversed and Telco's cross-motion granted.

Res JudicataCollateral EstoppelUnemployment BenefitsWrongful DischargeFalse ArrestMalicious ProsecutionSlanderAdministrative LawAppellate ReviewSummary Judgment
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Romero v. La Revise Associates L.L.C.

Ruben Romero initiated a lawsuit against La Revise Associates, LLC, Jean Denoyer, and Regis Marnier, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Romero sought conditional approval for a collective action on behalf of tipped employees and kitchen staff, claiming underpayment of minimum wage, improper tip credit notices, excessive non-tipped duties, and wage manipulation. Defendants contested the motion, citing existing arbitration agreements with many employees. The court granted Romero's motion for conditional approval, ruling that the arbitrability of claims is a merits issue not relevant at this preliminary stage. The court also approved the proposed notice, limiting the look-back period for potential plaintiffs to three years as per FLSA, rather than the six years under NYLL.

FLSANYLLCollective ActionConditional CertificationTipped EmployeesMinimum WageTip CreditArbitration AgreementsWage and Hour DisputesEmployment Law
References
32
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05128
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 2025

Matter of Romero v. Akorn Inc.

Rosa Romero sustained work-related injuries in 2015 and was later classified with a permanent partial disability. Despite a 75% loss of wage-earning capacity, she was denied an award due to failing to demonstrate labor market attachment. After a change in case law, Romero sought a schedule loss of use (SLU) award for her right leg, which was denied by the Workers' Compensation Board. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed this decision, ruling that Romero is entitled to an SLU award because no initial nonschedule award was made, and her lack of attachment to the labor market is irrelevant for SLU entitlement. The matter was remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.

Workers' Compensation LawSchedule Loss of Use (SLU)Permanent Partial DisabilityLabor Market AttachmentWage-Earning CapacityMaximum Medical ImprovementAppellate DivisionCase RemittalDuplicative CompensationImpairment Rating
References
5
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 02075
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 22, 2017

Romero v. 2200 Northern Steel, LLC

The plaintiff, Florentin Romero, commenced an action against 2200 Northern Steel, LLC, seeking damages for personal injuries sustained from a fall off a scissor lift while performing demolition work. He alleged violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6), along with common-law negligence. The Supreme Court initially granted Romero's motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, asserting that a falling beam required securing. However, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed this decision. The appellate court found that Romero failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to judgment, citing a factual dispute regarding the nature of the "beam" and insufficient evidence that its fall was due to an inadequate safety device. Consequently, the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action was denied.

Personal InjuryScissor LiftDemolition WorkLabor Law 240(1)Summary JudgmentFalling ObjectSafety DeviceAppellate ReviewPrima Facie BurdenConstruction Accident
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Romero

Defendant Israel Romero, an attorney from Honduras, was convicted of the unlawful practice of law and petit larceny. The central legal issue was whether the Attorney-General possessed the authority under Judiciary Law § 476-a (1) to initiate criminal prosecution for these offenses. The Court concluded that the term 'action' in the statute refers exclusively to a civil action, not a criminal one, a determination supported by the statutory language and legislative history, particularly sections 476-a and 476-b. The Court reasoned that extending 'action' to criminal prosecution would implausibly grant Bar associations the power to prosecute crimes. Consequently, lacking specific statutory authorization, the Attorney-General was found to be without the authority to criminally prosecute the defendant, leading to the reversal of the Appellate Division's order and the dismissal of the indictment.

Unlawful Practice of LawAttorney-General AuthorityCriminal LawCivil LawStatutory InterpretationJudiciary LawLegislative IntentProsecutorial DiscretionAppellate ProcedureIndictment Dismissal
References
7
Case No. 13483/93, 5550/94
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Ryan

This case addresses whether a court has the inherent power to vacate an illegal sentence more than one year after its imposition, particularly when the sentence was procured through the defendant's fraud and misrepresentation of his identity and criminal history. The defendant, initially identified as Robert Ryan, pleaded guilty to felonies in 1994 and was sentenced as a first-time offender. It was subsequently discovered in 1995 that he was a persistent violent felony offender under the name Keith Kittredge with numerous prior convictions. The court examined precedents regarding judicial power to correct errors after statutory time limits. Ultimately, the court concluded that it possesses the inherent authority to vacate the illegally imposed sentences due to the defendant's active fraud and deceit, distinguishing this situation from cases involving passive acceptance of illegal plea bargains. The matter was set for a hearing to determine new sentencing options or allow the defendant to withdraw his guilty pleas.

fraudmisrepresentationillegal sentenceinherent powervacate judgmentpersistent violent felony offenderpredicate felonyCPL 440.40double jeopardyplea bargain
References
11
Case No. CV-25-0250
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Alex Ryan

The claimant, Alex Ryan, with an established workers' compensation claim for a back injury from a 2018 work-related accident, had his indemnity benefits suspended in 2020 due to a failure to demonstrate labor market attachment. His subsequent request to revisit the labor attachment issue was denied, and that decision was affirmed. In 2024, he was classified with a permanent partial disability with a 71% loss of wage-earning capacity, but reinstatement of benefits was denied pending reattachment to the labor market. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed this denial. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, clarifying that while Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (3) (w) eliminates the need for ongoing labor market attachment in certain permanent partial disability cases, it still requires attachment at the time of classification. As the claimant presented no proof of reattachment at classification, his benefits could not be reinstated.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityLabor Market AttachmentIndemnity BenefitsWage-Earning CapacityStatutory InterpretationAdministrative AppealAppellate ReviewReinstatement of BenefitsDisability Benefits
References
6
Case No. G1999077
Regular Panel Decision
May 19, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Alex Ryan

The claimant, Alex Ryan, established a workers' compensation claim for a back injury in a 2018 work-related accident. He was found to be temporarily partially disabled and directed to produce evidence of job market search efforts. Instead, he presented a medical report for total disability based on a right hip injury, which was not part of the established claim. Consequently, his benefits were suspended. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the decision, finding no new evidence regarding his labor market attachment and ruling that the COVID-19 pandemic executive order was inapplicable as his benefits were suspended prior to it. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination that claimant remains unattached to the labor market and is not entitled to further benefits.

Workers' CompensationLabor Market AttachmentDisability BenefitsBack InjuryHip InjuryMedical ReportAppellate ReviewWCB DecisionSuspension of BenefitsCOVID-19 Impact
References
2
Case No. 535832
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 2023

In the Matter of the Claim of Tunin Romero

Claimant Tunin Romero, a carpenter, sustained injuries while working in June 2021. The employer, Capital Concrete, and its carrier, Accredited Surety and Casualty Company, failed to file a First Report of Injury or a notice of controversy. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim and found the carrier liable. The carrier's application for review by the Workers' Compensation Board (Board) was denied due to non-compliance with procedural rules, specifically 12 NYCRR 300.13 (b), for failing to interpose a specific objection to the WCLJ's ruling. The Board also affirmed the WCLJ's denial of further development of the record regarding the employer-employee relationship. The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, affirmed the Board's decision, finding no abuse of discretion.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsClaim EstablishmentBoard Review ApplicationProcedural ComplianceObjection InterposedWaiver of DefenseEmployer-Employee RelationshipAbuse of DiscretionAdministrative ReviewAppellate Practice
References
6
Case No. CV-23-1582
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Rosa Romero

Claimant, Rosa Romero, sustained work-related injuries in 2015, including to her right knee, head, neck, and back. She was classified with a permanent partial disability but initially denied awards due to a failure to demonstrate attachment to the labor market. Following a change in case law, claimant sought a Schedule Loss of Use (SLU) award for her right leg, supported by her treating physician's opinion of a 65% SLU. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board denied this request, citing prior findings and the absence of a prior SLU application. The Appellate Division reversed the Board's decision, ruling that since no initial award was made based on the nonschedule classification, claimant is entitled to an SLU award for her permanent partial impairments. The case has been remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings.

Schedule Loss of UsePermanent Partial DisabilityWorkers' Compensation BenefitsWage-Earning CapacityLabor Market AttachmentRight Knee InjuryMedical ImprovementAppellate ReviewRemittalCase Law Change
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 120 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