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

In re the Estate of Wilson

Dorothy S. Wilson, as executrix of the estate of Leonard R. Wilson, filed a petition for discovery against Lee Ford concerning the proceeds of Leonard R. Wilson's retirement plan, which named Ford as the beneficiary. Mr. Wilson died in 1985, having a vested benefit in the Corporate Profit Sharing Plan and Trust Agreement for Cobblestone Enterprises, Inc. The court considered the 1984 amendments to ERISA requiring a qualified preretirement survivor annuity (QPSA) for surviving spouses. Despite the plan's amendment occurring after Mr. Wilson's death, a transition rule mandated the QPSA amendments be treated as in effect at the time of death. The court, citing no New York authority, concluded that given the Cobblestone plan was a 'defined benefit plan' and under the ERISA transition rule, Dorothy S. Wilson, as the surviving spouse, was entitled to the entire $8,643.38 proceeds of the retirement plan.

ERISARetirement PlanQualified Preretirement Survivor AnnuityQPSADefined Benefit PlanTransition RuleSurviving SpouseBeneficiary DisputeEstateProbate
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Rosner

Petitioners, a husband and wife, initiated proceedings under SCPA article 17-A to be appointed coguardians for Irwin Rosner, a mentally retarded adult, alleging abandonment by his mother, respondent Marilyn Ferto. Ferto, along with Rosner's aunt Yetta Lippen, cross-petitioned for their own appointment. Surrogate’s Court denied the petitioners' application and appointed the respondents without conducting a hearing. The Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that the Surrogate’s Court erred by failing to hold a hearing as mandated by SCPA 1750 (2) (b) for non-parent applicants lacking parental consent. The court also emphasized the requirement for a hearing under SCPA 1752 and 1753 for guardianship petitions involving mentally retarded adults and standby guardians, respectively. Additionally, the Appellate Division determined that a guardian ad litem should have been appointed to represent Rosner's interests due to his alleged inability to understand the proceedings.

GuardianshipMentally Retarded PersonSCPA Article 17-AHearing RequirementAbandonmentGuardian Ad LitemSurrogate's CourtAppellate ReviewDue ProcessNon-Parent Guardianship
References
2
Case No. CV-22-2103
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of David Brown

Claimant David Brown, a truck driver, sought workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained during work. The Workers' Compensation Board initially found a right hip injury but later amended the claim to include neck, back, and right wrist injuries, based on substantial medical evidence from treating and independent orthopedic surgeons. The Board also reversed a Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a violation finding against Brown, concluding he did not demonstrate an intent to defraud despite prior accident history. The carrier appealed the Board's decision, challenging both the claim amendment and the fraud finding. The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to the Board's assessment of medical credibility and its finding regarding the absence of fraudulent intent, and also affirmed that an issue raised by the carrier was unpreserved for review.

Workers' CompensationTruck Driver InjuryWorkers' Compensation Law § 114-aFraud AllegationMedical CausationSpinal InjuryWrist InjuryHip InjuryPrior AccidentsDisclosure Requirements
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Estate of Certo

Michelle DeRose filed a petition alleging three causes of action against a decedent's estate: proving a lost will, establishing a common-law marriage in Pennsylvania, and imposing a constructive trust. The court dismissed the first cause of action due to lack of proof regarding the will's execution and non-revocation under SCPA 1407. The second cause of action was dismissed as DeRose failed to provide clear and convincing evidence to establish a common-law marriage in Pennsylvania, particularly in rebutting the presumption of an illicit relationship and proving a general reputation as husband and wife. The third cause of action for a constructive trust was also dismissed, as DeRose failed to prove a promise, a transfer in reliance, or unjust enrichment. Consequently, all petitioner's claims were dismissed, and she was directed to vacate the decedent's premises.

Lost willCommon-law marriageConstructive trustSurrogate's Court Procedure ActPennsylvania lawBurden of proofSpousal claimsEstate litigationMeretricious relationshipFiduciary relationship
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 1979

In re the General Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors of Am-Lon Knit Goods Finishing Corp.

This proceeding involved an assignee for the benefit of creditors seeking judicial determination of priority among various creditor claims. The claims included those from the Federal Government, preferred wage claims, the New York State Tax Commission for income withholding taxes, the Industrial Commissioner for unemployment insurance contributions, the Director of Finance of the City of New York for various city taxes, and two insurance companies for workers' compensation insurance premiums. The court reconsidered an earlier decision and clarified that Labor Law § 574 is applicable and controlling in this context, establishing parity between New York State and City tax claims. Consequently, these tax claims were granted priority over the workers' compensation insurance premiums. The decision also distinguishes insolvency proceedings from decedent's estate cases, which are governed by SCPA 1811.

InsolvencyCreditor PriorityTax ClaimsUnemployment InsuranceWorkers' CompensationAssignee for Benefit of CreditorsState TaxesCity TaxesLabor LawSCPA
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Guardianship of Mark C.H.

This case addresses whether New York's SCPA article 17-A, governing guardianship for persons with mental retardation and developmental disabilities, meets constitutional standards without requiring periodic reporting and review. The facts involve Mark C.H., an adult with profound autism and mental retardation, for whom a $3 million trust existed but whose guardians (petitioner, his late mother's attorney, and a corporate bank) initially failed to use funds for his benefit, leading to suboptimal care. The court, applying the Mathews v Eldridge test and considering international human rights norms, found that the significant infringement on a ward's liberty interests necessitates periodic oversight. Consequently, the court held that article 17-A must be read to include a requirement for yearly reporting and judicial review for guardians of the person. The guardianship for Mark C.H. was granted to the petitioner with this new yearly reporting obligation.

GuardianshipDue ProcessMental RetardationDevelopmental DisabilitiesSCPA Article 17-APeriodic ReviewWard's RightsTrust Funds MismanagementMedical Care AccessConstitutional Law
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Estate of Toribio

The case involves an uncontested proceeding for an administrator to resign and for a successor to be appointed. The initial administrator, Jennifer, wishes to resign from her role in the estate of her three-year-old sister, Jannin, who died tragically. She requests the court appoint their father, Domingo Toribio, as the new administrator. The primary legal question addressed by Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen is whether Mr. Toribio, who only speaks, reads, and writes in Spanish, is qualified to serve as a fiduciary under SCPA 707 (2), which allows a court discretion to declare a person unable to read and write English ineligible. The court examines the legislative intent, relevant case law, and societal changes regarding disability and non-English-speaking populations, particularly in New York City. The opinion concludes that English language competence should not be a prerequisite for fiduciary status unless no reasonable accommodations are possible, and grants the application for Jennifer's resignation and Domingo Toribio's appointment, noting he and his counsel have established satisfactory communication.

Estate AdministrationSurrogate's CourtFiduciary AppointmentLanguage BarrierEnglish ProficiencySCPA 707 (2)Multilingual SocietyJudicial DiscretionCivil RightsAccess to Justice
References
12
Showing 1-7 of 7 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