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. 2024-50-3519
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2025

Green, Crystal v. 101 Vape & Smoke, LLC

Crystal Green, an employee, appealed a trial court's decision regarding her workers' compensation claim against 101 Vape & Smoke, LLC, following a right ankle injury. The trial court had initially ruled that multiple related companies with common ownership could be considered a single entity, thus meeting the five-employee threshold for workers' compensation coverage, and ordered the employer to provide a panel of physicians. However, it denied temporary disability benefits due to a lack of medical evidence. The Appeals Board reversed this decision, finding insufficient proof that 101 Vape & Smoke, LLC, as a standalone entity, employed the requisite number of people. The Board emphasized that the critical inquiry is whether the specific employer directly utilized the services of five or more paid individuals, not whether separate LLCs could be collectively grouped without such evidence, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation EligibilitySmall Business EmployerEmployee Threshold DeterminationCorporate Veil PiercingConsolidated EmployersAppellate Review StandardsJurisdictional DisputesProof of EmploymentTemporary Benefits DenialPhysician Panel Order
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Distributors Division, Smoked Fish Workers Union, Local No. 20377

The Attorney-General initiated an action seeking a permanent injunction against the Distributors Division, Smoked Fish Workers Union, Local No. 20377, its president Murray Brodsky, and business agent Jack Flaum. The complaint alleged that the defendants engaged in an illegal combination, violating New York's Donnelly Anti-Trust Law (General Business Law § 340), by coercing manufacturers and retailers in the smoked fish industry to deal exclusively with Distributors Division members. Although the defendants claimed exemption as a bona fide labor union, the court found that the Distributors Division was merely a jobbers association disguised as a union to create a monopoly and restrain trade. The organization's activities involved threats, intimidation, and misleading picketing to compel adherence to its demands, ultimately harming competition and forcing retailers to pay higher prices. Consequently, the court ruled that the injunction should be granted, concluding that the Distributors Division was not a legitimate labor union and its practices were illegal.

anti-trustmonopolylabor unioninjunctiontrade restraintGeneral Business LawDonnelly Actjobbers associationcoercionpicketing
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Landgraff v. 1579 Bronx River Avenue, LLC

This personal injury action arises from allegations that plaintiff Anthony Landgraff sustained injuries during employment with J.H. Loewy, Inc., a plumbing subcontractor, while removing a sprinkler system at premises owned by 1575 Bronx River Avenue, LLC and renovated by LSK Smoked Turkey Products, Inc. The injured plaintiff fell from a scaffold due to insufficient safety devices. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, granting the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment as to liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). The court also granted 1575 Bronx River Avenue, LLC's cross-motion for contractual indemnification against J.H. Loewy, Inc. and LSK Smoked Turkey Products, Inc., and LSK Smoked Turkey Products, Inc.'s cross-motion for contractual indemnification against J.H. Loewy, Inc. Additionally, 1575 Bronx River Avenue, LLC was found entitled to common-law indemnification from LSK Smoked Turkey Products, Inc. However, the court declined to grant summary judgment for 1575 Bronx River Avenue, LLC against J.H. Loewy, Inc. on common-law indemnification and against LSK Smoked Turkey Products, Inc. on contractual indemnification due to an inadequate record. The matter was remanded for further proceedings.

personal injuryscaffold accidentLabor Lawabsolute liabilityindemnificationcontractual indemnificationcommon-law indemnificationgrave injurysummary judgmentappellate review
References
17
Case No. 525010
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 08, 2018

Matter of Esposito v. Tutor Perini Corp.

Claimant Joseph Esposito sought workers' compensation benefits for various lung diseases, alleging causation from workplace pollutant exposure while employed by Tutor Perini Corporation. The Workers' Compensation Board initially precluded the reports and testimony of claimant's medical expert, Lester Ploss, due to non-compliance with regulations governing independent medical examination reports, specifically the failure to submit referenced documents to the Board. Ultimately, the Board found insufficient credible evidence to establish the claim. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that substantial evidence supported the ruling. The Board credited the testimony of Dr. Monroe Karetzky, who attributed Esposito's pulmonary issues to cigarette smoking rather than his work environment, and also discredited the claimant's work history and personal smoking habits.

Workers' Compensation LawIndependent Medical Examination (IME)Evidentiary RulingsMedical Expert TestimonyCausation (Medical)Pulmonary DiseaseCredibility DeterminationsSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewRegulatory Compliance
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Santos v. American Museum of Natural History

Guaquin Garcia died after a scaffold fall during renovations at a building leased by the American Museum of Natural History. His estate sued the Museum and the general contractor for wrongful death. The Museum moved for summary judgment, arguing it lacked Labor Law liability as it didn't own, contract for, or supervise the work. The Supreme Court denied this motion, but on appeal, the order was reversed. The appellate court found the Museum, as a lessee, was not liable under Labor Law § 240, having neither contracted for nor supervised the renovation work, and thus lacked authority over safety measures.

Wrongful DeathScaffold AccidentLabor Law Section 240Summary Judgment AppealPremises LiabilityLessee LiabilityRenovation ProjectWorksite SafetyAppellate CourtBuilding Owner Responsibility
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Danielson v. United Seafood Workers Smoked Fish & Cannery Union, Local 359

The case involves a petition by Sidney Danielson, Regional Director of the NLRB, seeking a preliminary injunction against United Seafood Workers Smoked Fish & Cannery Union, Local 359, AFL-CIO. The union was charged with unfair labor practices, specifically secondary boycotts, targeting several fish businesses (charging parties) at the New York Fulton Fish Market to coerce them into recognizing Local 359 as their employees' bargaining agent. An evidentiary hearing revealed a concerted effort by union members, often directed by union officials like Carmine Romano and Anthony O’Connor, to obstruct the charging parties' ability to buy and deliver fish, leading to significant business disruption. The court found reasonable cause to believe the union had violated the National Labor Relations Act, holding Local 359 responsible under theories of mass action and agency for its members' and officials' conduct. Concluding that the charging parties faced irreparable harm, the court granted the preliminary injunction to prevent further unlawful activities, while also finding union officials in civil contempt but delaying the imposition of penalties.

Labor LawSecondary BoycottUnfair Labor PracticeNational Labor Relations Act (NLRA)Preliminary InjunctionCollective BargainingUnion LiabilityMass Action TheoryCivil ContemptFulton Fish Market
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Konieczny v. Butterflake Shop

Claimant appealed a decision by the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed December 8, 1977, which ruled that he did not suffer from an occupational disease. The claimant, employed as a baker, was diagnosed with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthmatic bronchitis, and emphysema, following a history of heavy smoking. The record contained conflicting medical evidence regarding the link between his employment and his condition. The court affirmed the Board's determination, holding that when medical proof is contradictory, the question of occupational disease is one of fact for the Board, and their finding was supported by substantial evidence, particularly Dr. Riley's testimony.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' CompensationChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseAsthmatic BronchitisEmphysemaConflicting Medical EvidenceQuestion of FactSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewMedical Testimony
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Connolly v. Hubert's Service, Inc.

Claimant sought workers' compensation death benefits for her husband, an automobile mechanic, citing occupational asbestos exposure as the cause of his lung cancer and subsequent death. The Workers' Compensation Board denied the claim, finding no credible medical evidence of significant occupational asbestos exposure. The employer and carriers' medical expert attributed the lung cancer to the decedent's long-standing smoking history and family predisposition, concluding employment did not contribute to his death. Despite conflicting medical opinions presented by the claimant, the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that substantial evidence supported the Board's findings.

Workers' CompensationLung CancerAsbestos ExposureOccupational DiseaseCausationMedical EvidenceSmoking HistoryAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionDeath Benefits
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Arnold v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

This worker's compensation case involves Mr. Arnold, who sought compensation for disability from allergic asthma and bronchitis, an occupational disease. The plaintiff's underlying condition was primarily attributed to his history of smoking, but the trial court found that it was significantly aggravated by the inhalation of various substances at the Firestone Plant where he worked for nearly 40 years. This aggravation led to a finding of permanent and total disability. The defendant appealed, arguing the condition was not work-related and only temporary. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, emphasizing the principle that an employer is liable for disabilities resulting from the aggravation of a pre-existing condition brought about by occupation, even if the underlying condition was not initially work-related.

Worker's CompensationOccupational DiseaseAllergic AsthmaBronchitisAggravation of Pre-existing ConditionSmokingIndustrial ExposurePermanent DisabilityEmployer LiabilityCausation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 2000

Claim of Oliver v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co.

Claimant, a gear cutter exposed to cutting oils for nearly two decades, developed laryngeal cancer, leading to the surgical removal of a malignant carcinoma. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled this an occupational disease and awarded benefits, a decision the employer subsequently appealed. Expert physician Michael Lax testified that, despite the claimant's smoking and alcohol history, prolonged exposure to cutting oils was a significant contributing factor to the cancer, citing epidemiological studies. The court found sufficient evidence to establish a recognizable link between the claimant's employment and the disease, rejecting the employer's contention that Lax's opinion was speculative. Consequently, the Board's decision to award workers' compensation benefits was affirmed.

Occupational diseaselaryngeal cancercutting oils exposurecausationexpert testimonyepidemiological studiesworkers' compensation benefitsappellate decisionmedical evidencejudicial review
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 960 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