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. 2025 NY Slip Op 04032
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 02, 2025

Ruiz v. Ewan

The plaintiff, Kenneth Ruiz, was allegedly injured during the construction of a home when a ladder he was descending slipped, causing him to fall 10 to 12 feet. He initiated a lawsuit against F.M. Peroni, Inc., the general contractor, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court denied Ruiz's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court's decision, finding that Ruiz had established a prima facie case of a Labor Law § 240 (1) violation, demonstrating that the inadequately secured ladder was the proximate cause of his injuries. The defendant failed to present a triable issue of fact, leading to the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on liability being granted against F.M. Peroni, Inc.

Construction AccidentLadder FallLabor Law 240(1)Elevation-Related HazardSummary JudgmentGeneral Contractor LiabilityProximate CauseSafety Device FailureAppellate ReviewPersonal Injury
References
8
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 02820 [160 AD3d 1001]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2018

Ruiz v. Ford

Plaintiff Alan Ruiz, a Verizon service technician, sustained personal injuries when tires fell from an office shed roof, struck his ladder, and caused him to fall at premises owned by 5102 Foster Avenue Trust. Ruiz commenced an action against Mike Ford and the Trust, alleging common-law negligence, which was later amended to a single cause of action against the Trust for a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court granted Ruiz's motion for judgment as a matter of law on liability and denied the Trust's cross-motion to dismiss. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed the applicability of Labor Law § 240 (1). The court determined that the statute was not implicated as the falling tires were not materials being hoisted or secured, nor was it expected that they would require securing for the undertaking. Consequently, the judgment in favor of the plaintiff was reversed, the Trust's motion to vacate was granted, the plaintiff's motion was denied, the Trust's cross-motion was granted, and the amended complaint was dismissed.

Personal InjuryFalling ObjectLadder AccidentPremises LiabilityStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewCPLR 4401Judgment as a Matter of LawConstruction SafetyLabor Law Compliance
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ruiz v. Lavine

Petitioners Pedro and Flora Ruiz initiated an Article 78 proceeding to challenge the denial of medical assistance by the Monroe County Department of Social Services, a decision affirmed by Commissioner Abe Lavine. The Ruiz couple, having moved from Puerto Rico to Rochester due to Mrs. Ruiz's critical kidney illness requiring immediate hemodialysis, were denied aid on the premise of non-residency and having moved solely for medical treatment. The court, led by Goldman, J., annulled this determination, concluding that the prior fair hearing inappropriately focused on the petitioners' motivation for relocation rather than their genuine intent to establish New York residency. Emphasizing that health-related moves are valid for domicile and that continued property ownership in their prior residence does not negate new domicile, the court remitted the case for a new hearing to properly assess the Ruiz's residential intent.

DomicileResidency RequirementMedical AssistanceSocial Services LawArticle 78Intent to ResideHealth ReasonsConstitutional Right to TravelFair HearingRemand
References
12
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 05419 [231 AD3d 683]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 31, 2024

Ruiz v. BOP 245 Park LLC

Plaintiff Jose Ruiz moved for summary judgment on liability for his Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6) claims after falling from a scaffold lacking guardrails. The Supreme Court initially denied the motion. However, the Appellate Division, First Department, modified the order, granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim. The court found that plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment, and defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the recalcitrant worker defense or plaintiff's veracity, as there was no evidence that sufficient guardrails were available at the worksite.

Scaffold AccidentSummary JudgmentLabor Law 240(1)Appellate DivisionRecalcitrant Worker DefenseConstruction SafetyPersonal InjuryGuardrailsWorkplace InjurySafety Equipment
References
7
Case No. ADJ3021055
Regular
May 12, 2010

MIGUEL RUIZ vs. PAT LOFTIS FARMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Miguel Ruiz's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's report, which found Ruiz's testimony not credible. The judge based this finding on conflicting evidence regarding the water truck/trailer involved in the alleged injury and other inconsistencies in Ruiz's statements. The denial upholds the original order that Ruiz take nothing from his claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgecredibilityGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Findings and Orderpro perinjurylow back injuryfall
References
1
Case No. ADJ317834
Regular
Sep 13, 2011

Alexis Ruiz vs. Valley and Farm, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision that found Alexis Ruiz was the initial aggressor in an incident leading to his injury. The Board adopted the administrative law judge's (WCJ) report, which found Ruiz's account less credible than the defense's. Key factors included Ruiz's failure to report the alleged assault immediately to his employer, inconsistencies in his testimony, and his cousin's absence as a witness. The WCJ's credibility determination, based on a review of the entire record, was given great weight.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationInitial AggressorAOE/COECredibility FindingTake NothingAffirmative DefenseEvidentiary HearingsSummary of EvidencePercepient Witness
References
1
Case No. ADJ3447817 (SJO 0260464)
Regular
Dec 10, 2012

LIZABETH RUIZ vs. SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND (SIBTF)

This case concerns Lizabeth Ruiz's petition for reconsideration of the denial of Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) benefits. Ruiz argued she had a pre-existing "labor disabling" psychiatric condition prior to her subsequent industrial injury. The Board affirmed its prior decision, holding that Ruiz failed to meet her burden of proof to establish that her pre-existing condition was labor-disabling and compensable at the time of the subsequent injury. The Board reiterated that retroactive medical evaluations are insufficient without contemporaneous evidence of such disability, and denied the petition to reopen the record.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundSIBTFlabor disablingpermanent disabilitycumulative traumapsychiatric conditioncontemporaneous evidencerating methodologyadministrative law judgepetition for reconsideration
References
6
Case No. ADJ10946930, ADJ10946848, ADJ10902572
Regular
Jan 13, 2020

Angelica Ruiz vs. Charter Oak Unified School District, York Risk Services

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by the applicant, Angelica Ruiz, against Charter Oak Unified School District and York Risk Services. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, finding that Ruiz failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denial. The WCAB also determined that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy should an adverse decision issue later. Furthermore, the Board noted that sufficient time had passed for either party to place the matter back on the calendar.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJ ReportAdministrative Law JudgeExtraordinary RemedyFinal DecisionDeclaration of Readiness
References
2
Case No. ADJ8266811 ADJ8710466
Regular
Jan 12, 2017

LILIANA RUIZ vs. MCDONALD'S, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION

This case involves Liliana Ruiz filing eleven workers' compensation claims against McDonald's, six of which were consolidated. One defendant, Zenith Insurance Company, settled two of these consolidated cases with Ruiz via a Compromise and Release for $20,000. Another defendant, California Restaurant Mutual Benefit Corporation (administered by American Claims Management), petitioned for reconsideration, arguing the settlement contravened consolidation purposes. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report which found American Claims failed to demonstrate prejudice or good cause to set aside the settlement. The Board clarified that Zenith's settlement resolved only its potential liability and did not affect American Claims' right to seek contribution.

Petition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseContributionConsolidationCumulative TraumaAOE/COEApportionmentInsurance CoverageWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
2
Case No. ADJ8876167
Regular
Sep 18, 2015

Manuel Ruiz vs. Schwan's Home Services, Inc., Hartford Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision. The defendant argued the ALJ erred by admitting a Qualified Medical Evaluator's (QME) reports and by ordering a second QME panel in internal medicine. The Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm to warrant removal, agreeing with the ALJ that the QME substantially complied with reporting deadlines and that an internal medicine evaluation was warranted due to the applicant's alleged stroke. Therefore, removal was deemed an inappropriate and extraordinary remedy.

RemovalPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationQualified Medical EvaluatorQME panelpsychology
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 73 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