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. 2016 NY Slip Op 06673 [143 AD3d 749]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 2016

Beeker v. Islip U-Slip, LLC

The plaintiff, Jeffrey Beeker, allegedly sustained personal injuries from a fall on an exterior staircase at a commercial warehouse owned by Islip U-Slip, LLC. At the time, the plaintiff was employed by nonparty Raymours Furniture Company, Inc., and Raymour & Flanigan Properties, LLC, was under contract to purchase the warehouse. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Islip U-Slip was an out-of-possession landlord and RFP was either a joint venture with or alter ego of the plaintiff's employer, thereby invoking Workers' Compensation exclusivity. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' motion. The Appellate Division affirmed the denial, finding the defendants failed to establish prima facie either the joint venture/alter ego relationship or that Islip U-Slip lacked a contractual duty to maintain the staircase.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityOut-of-Possession LandlordPremises LiabilityAppellate ReviewDuty to MaintainAlter EgoJoint VentureStaircase Fall
References
11
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 05979 [164 AD3d 1505]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 06, 2018

Matter of Levin v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst.

Lew H. Levin, a maintenance worker, sustained a left shoulder injury after slipping on ice and established a workers' compensation claim. He later sought to amend his claim to include a causally-related right shoulder injury after experiencing pain during light-duty work. Both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board disallowed the claim for the right shoulder injury, concluding that the claimant failed to establish a causal relationship. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, noting that the claimant provided inconsistent histories regarding the incident and that the Board appropriately assessed the credibility of both the claimant's testimony and the medical evidence. The court found substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that the right shoulder injury was not causally related to the work incident.

Workers' Compensation ClaimShoulder InjuryCausality DisputeMedical OpinionCredibility AssessmentAppellate ReviewBurden of ProofInconsistent TestimonyWork-Related AccidentWorkers' Compensation Board Decision
References
11
Case No. ADJ10443669
Regular
Oct 04, 2017

Donna Carter vs. Rose International Group, OneBeacon Insurance Group

The Appeals Board affirmed the Workers' Compensation Judge's finding that Donna Carter sustained an industrial injury to her right knee and left wrist on May 18, 2016. Despite inconsistencies in the applicant's testimony regarding a slip and fall incident, her account was corroborated by a witness who found her on the floor. Medical records from the day of the incident also supported the applicant's claim, establishing a clear mechanism of injury. The Board found that the common sense nature of a slip and fall does not require expert medical opinion to establish industrial causation for the incident itself.

ADJ10443669Rose International GroupOneBeacon Insurance GroupDonna CarterWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationslip and fallindustrial injuryright kneeleft wrist
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McGerald v. DiNapoli

Petitioner, a police officer for the Suffolk County Police Department, sought accidental disability retirement benefits following three separate incidents in 1990 and 1998 that allegedly caused disabling back injuries. Respondent Comptroller denied the application. The Comptroller found that the February 2, 1990 and March 30, 1998 incidents (slipping on wet grass, slipping on stairs at police headquarters) did not constitute accidents under Retirement and Social Security Law § 363, as they occurred during ordinary employment duties without an unexpected event. For the March 29, 1998 incident, the Comptroller concluded that petitioner failed to provide timely notice to his employer as required by Retirement and Social Security Law § 363 (c) and Workers’ Compensation Law § 18. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued, with the court confirming the Comptroller's determination and dismissing the petition.

Accidental Disability RetirementPolice Officer InjurySuffolk County PoliceComptroller DeterminationRetirement and Social Security LawTimely NoticeOrdinary Employment DutiesSlipping IncidentBack Injury ClaimCPLR Article 78 Proceeding
References
8
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 03063
Regular Panel Decision
May 28, 2020

Williams v. New York City Hous. Auth.

Plaintiff Carson Williams sued the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), Liro Program, and Corbex, Inc. after a slip and fall incident caused by a ceiling leak at Castle Hill Houses. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to all defendants, dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, modified the lower court's decision, denying NYCHA's motion for summary judgment and reinstating the complaint against them. The appellate court found that factual issues existed regarding NYCHA's potential long-standing notice of the leak condition, based on a witness affidavit and photographic evidence. However, the dismissal of claims against Liro and Corbex was affirmed, as they were contractors and not landowners, and therefore did not owe a direct duty to the plaintiff.

Slip and FallPremises LiabilitySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewNegligenceLandowner LiabilityContractor LiabilityNotice of DefectAffidavit SufficiencyRoutine Inspection
References
5
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 01889
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 16, 2020

Matter of Kotok v. Victoria's Secret

Claimant Brenda Kotok, a sales specialist for Victoria's Secret, sought workers' compensation benefits after sustaining a right ankle injury in March 2017 when she slipped and fell on a flooded bathroom floor at work. The self-insured employer controverted the claim, arguing a lack of causal relationship. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim for the right ankle, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The employer appealed. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence, including medical opinions from a podiatrist and an orthopedist, supported the finding that the injury was compensable and causally related, despite conflicting testimony regarding the incident's occurrence. The Court gives great deference to the Board's evaluation of proof, particularly on causation.

Workers' CompensationAnkle InjurySlip and FallCausationSubstantial EvidenceMedical Opinion ConflictWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate ReviewSales SpecialistWorkplace Accident
References
13
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 06308
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 07, 2023

Axelrod v. 44 Lexington Assoc., LLC

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's denial of summary judgment for Transition Management Corporation (TMC). The case concerned Nicole Axelrod's slip and fall, with TMC arguing its engineers were special employees of 44 Lexington Associates, LLC, absolving TMC of vicarious liability. However, the court found genuine issues of material fact. The service agreement indicated TMC retained control over its engineers, including responsibilities for payment, insurance, and the right to terminate employment, thus raising questions about the special employee doctrine. Additionally, unresolved factual issues persisted regarding whether TMC's employees created or exacerbated the hazard, and the scope of the service agreement's coverage, which included the restaurant where the incident occurred, further supported the denial of summary judgment and the survival of contractual indemnification cross-claims.

Summary judgmentVicarious liabilitySpecial employee doctrineControl over employeesService agreementContractual indemnificationSlip and fallNegligenceIssues of factAppellate Division
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 08, 2005

Duffy v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Plaintiff sued Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Floor Management, Inc. for personal injuries from a slip and fall on a wet floor inside a Wal-Mart store. Floor Management, a subcontractor for floor cleaning, moved for summary judgment, arguing it had subcontracted its responsibilities to Crystal Clear Nationwide Management and was not actively involved. Wal-Mart cross-moved for contractual indemnification from Floor Management. The Supreme Court denied Floor Management’s motion and partially granted Wal-Mart’s cross-motion, requiring Floor Management to defend Wal-Mart. On cross appeals, the appellate court modified the order, granting Floor Management's motion for summary judgment, finding no liability to plaintiff. The court also granted Wal-Mart's motion for indemnification from Floor Management, applying Arkansas law as per a choice of law provision, and found Floor Management entitled to indemnification from Crystal Clear Nationwide Management.

Personal InjurySlip and FallSummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationSubcontractor LiabilityIndependent ContractorChoice of LawArkansas LawNegligenceAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 03030 [127 AD3d 446]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 09, 2015

Sevilla v. Calhoun School, Inc.

Plaintiff Reyna Sevilla appealed an order granting summary judgment to defendants, The Calhoun School, Inc., and others, after her complaint was dismissed. The case involved a slip and fall incident during a freezing-rain storm. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding no negligence on their part for failing to remove ice during a storm in progress. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, noting that defendants followed their regular maintenance protocols and plaintiff failed to provide evidence that their actions created or exacerbated a hazardous condition. The court also found plaintiff's other arguments unavailing.

Slip and FallSummary JudgmentNegligenceIce RemovalStorm in Progress DoctrinePremises LiabilityMaintenance ProtocolHazardous ConditionAppellate ReviewAffirmed Decision
References
2
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 05642 [221 AD3d 1157]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 2023

Matter of Pileggi v. DiNapoli

Petitioner Shelby Pileggi, a police officer, sought accidental disability retirement benefits after sustaining back and neck injuries from a slip and fall while exiting her patrol car to get coffee. The respondent, State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, denied her application, concluding the incident occurred during a personal activity rather than job duties. The Appellate Division, Third Department, confirmed this determination, finding substantial evidence supported the Comptroller's finding that the petitioner was not injured while in service, despite her assertion of being 'always on duty.' The Court dismissed the petition, reiterating that precedent under Workers' Compensation Law is not binding on the Comptroller.

Accidental Disability Retirement BenefitsPolice OfficerIn-Service InjuryPersonal ActivitySlipping and FallingPatrol Car IncidentDisability Retirement ApplicationSubstantial EvidenceArticle 78 ProceedingState Comptroller
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 4,241 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