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
Oct 28, 2004

Bayne v. City of New York

The plaintiff appealed a judgment in a personal injury case where she fell on a sidewalk in Queens. The Supreme Court initially ruled in favor of the defendant, the City of New York. The appellate court reversed this judgment, granting the plaintiff's motion to set aside the jury verdict and ordering a new trial. The reversal was based on trial court errors, including the preclusion of testimony from a witness regarding the sidewalk's condition and an Emergency Medical Services worker's testimony about the plaintiff's statement at the scene, which were considered admissible as a present sense impression and relevant to the case.

Personal injurySidewalk defectEvidentiary errorWitness testimonyHearsayPresent sense impressionJury verdictAppellate reviewNew trialPreclusion of evidence
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 15, 2005

Keese v. Imperial Gardens Associates, LLC

The plaintiff appealed an Orange County Supreme Court order that granted summary judgment to the defendants in a personal injury action. The plaintiff claimed to have fallen on ice on a sidewalk near an apartment complex, alleging that snow had been improperly piled. The defendants, Sarillo Landscaping (snow removal contractor), Imperial Gardens Associates, LLC (owner), and Westminster Management, L.E (managing agent), had been granted summary judgment. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, finding that evidence suggested snow was placed on the sidewalk contrary to standard operating procedure, creating a potentially dangerous condition. The court concluded that the defendants failed to establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, thereby denying their motions for summary judgment.

Personal InjurySlip and FallIce AccumulationSnow RemovalSummary JudgmentNegligenceAppellate ReviewPremises LiabilityProperty Owner ResponsibilityContractor Liability
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 31, 2011

Tzic v. Kasampas

The injured plaintiff fell 15 feet from a sidewalk shed opening at a construction site due to inadequate safety devices. The Supreme Court granted partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) against the owners, Christina Serafis Kasampas and Nicholas Serafis, and determined the plaintiff suffered a 'grave injury' under Workers’ Compensation Law § 11. The court denied the owners' cross-motion for summary judgment on indemnification and partially denied MSS Construction Corp.'s cross-motion to dismiss claims. The appellate court unanimously affirmed this order, finding the statutory violation was a proximate cause of the injuries and rejecting arguments of contributory negligence or the owners' lack of control over safety.

Construction AccidentFall from HeightSidewalk ShedLabor Law 240(1)Strict LiabilityGrave InjuryWorkers' Compensation LawSummary JudgmentIndemnification ClaimsProximate Cause
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2004

Claim of Scally v. Ravena Coeymans Selkirk Central School District

In this case, a claimant appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding apportionment of her workers' compensation award. The claimant, who suffered a work-related left knee injury in 2002, had a pre-existing non-work-related injury to the same knee from 1986. While a WCLJ initially denied apportionment, the Board reversed, directing a 50/50 apportionment based on the premise that the prior injury would have resulted in a schedule loss of use award had it been work-related. The appellate court upheld the Board's determination, deferring to its interpretation that a non-work-related injury leading to a schedule loss of use constitutes a "disability in a compensation sense" for apportionment purposes. This decision was supported by medical expert testimony indicating a schedule loss of use from the prior surgery.

Workers' CompensationApportionmentKnee InjuryNon-work-related InjurySchedule Loss of UsePreexisting ConditionMedical Expert TestimonyBoard InterpretationJudicial ReviewAppellate Decision
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2006

Claim of Cushion v. Brooklyn Botanic Garden

Claimant, an employee of Brooklyn Botanic Garden, sustained an injury after falling on a broken sidewalk in a public parking lot adjacent to her workplace while commuting home. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge established the case as a work-related injury, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, concluding the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, reasoning that the risk of injury from the broken sidewalk was not a "special hazard" but a risk shared with the general public, thus falling outside the compensable "gray area" of the going and coming rule.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentGoing and Coming RulePublic Parking LotOff-Premises InjurySpecial HazardGray Area DoctrineSidewalk Fall
References
5
Case No. CV-24-0499
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 09, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Kimberly Ericson

Claimant Kimberly A. Ericson appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that denied her claim for benefits, ruling her injuries did not arise out of and in the course of her employment. Ericson sustained injuries when she tripped on a public sidewalk while commuting to work, arguing that municipal codes requiring her employer to maintain sidewalks should entitle her to compensation. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found for Ericson, but the Board reversed. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding no special hazard at the fall site and no close association of the access route with the premises, concluding that the injuries were not incident to her employment.

Workers' CompensationPublic Sidewalk FallCommuting InjuryArising Out Of EmploymentCourse Of EmploymentSpecial Hazard RulePremises RuleMunicipal CodeAppellate ReviewInjury Compensability
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 08, 1999

Marovic v. 1412 Broadway Associates

The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed the denial of a building owner's motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action. The plaintiff was injured when struck by sheetrock carried by construction workers. Issues of fact concerning the building owner's negligence in supervising its independent contractor precluded summary judgment. Evidence showed the owner's involvement in scheduling, freight policies, and decisions regarding public warnings. The court also clarified that moving heavy sheetrock on a busy sidewalk is not inherently dangerous without additional factors.

Personal injuryNegligenceSummary judgmentBuilding owner liabilityIndependent contractorSidewalk safetyFactual issuesAppellate reviewConstruction accidentSupervision
References
1
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05555
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 09, 2025

Matter of Ericson v. FOJP Serv. Corp.

Claimant Kimberly A. Ericson appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that denied her claim for benefits. Ericson sustained injuries after tripping on a public sidewalk while on her way to work. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found her injuries compensable, but the Board reversed, concluding the injuries did not arise out of and in the course of her employment. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, reiterating that accidents outside of work hours and away from the workplace are generally not compensable. The Court found no special hazard at the site of the fall and no close association of the access route with the employer's premises that would bring the accident within an exception to the 'going and coming rule', despite municipal codes requiring the employer to maintain adjacent sidewalks.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsTrip and FallPublic SidewalkCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentGoing and Coming RuleSpecial Hazard ExceptionAccess RouteMunicipal CodePremises Liability
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Eastern District Repetitive Stress Injury Litigation

The defendants sought to transfer 78 repetitive stress injury (RSI) cases from the Eastern District of New York to districts where the claims arose, also seeking severance of individual claims. Over 450 RSI cases, involving over 1,000 plaintiffs against more than 100 equipment manufacturers, were initially consolidated in the Eastern District. However, the Second Circuit later vacated the consolidation orders, finding it an abuse of discretion due to lack of common facts and varying state laws. Relying on this guidance, the court granted transfer in 75 cases and denied it in three, citing factors such as convenience of parties and witnesses, judicial economy, and the public interest in local adjudication of local controversies. The court also ordered severance where necessary to facilitate transfer.

Transfer of VenueMultidistrict LitigationRepetitive Stress InjuryProducts LiabilityForum Non ConveniensSeverance of ClaimsConsolidation of CasesJudicial EconomyWitness ConvenienceChoice of Forum
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2004

Mercado v. Schenectady City School District

Claimant, an elementary school employee in Schenectady County, sustained injuries to her right arm and shoulder after slipping on an icy sidewalk on December 17, 2002, while walking to work. The incident occurred approximately 200 feet from the elementary school entrance, on a sidewalk in front of an adjacent middle school, which the employer maintained and considered part of its property. The Workers' Compensation Board found the injury occurred on the employer's premises and arose out of and in the course of her employment, sustaining the claim. The employer appealed, arguing the injury was not on their premises. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's factual finding that the claimant fell within the precincts of her employment, noting that being on the employer's premises going to or coming from work is generally considered an incident of employment.

Workers' CompensationPremises LiabilityCourse of EmploymentAccidental InjuryIcy SidewalkSchenectady CountyAppellate DivisionEmployer ControlBoard DecisionSlip and Fall
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 12,731 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