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. ADJ1063483 (SBR 0342621)
Regular
Sep 07, 2016

SONG ROGERS (Deceased); RICHARD ROGERS, vs. ALLIED VAN LINES, TRANSGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA

This case involves Allied Van Lines seeking reconsideration of a prior order finding their employee, Song Rogers (now deceased), sustained a work-related injury. The employer argued the finding was based solely on the inconsistent testimony of the deceased's husband regarding employment details. The Board denied the petition, adopting the judge's findings that the husband's testimony was credible despite apparent inconsistencies. The Board emphasized the judge's opportunity to assess witness demeanor as critical to the credibility determination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAllied Van LinesTransguard Insurance Company of AmericaSong RogersRichard RogersFindings and OrderDarren Bergey M.D.employee statuscredibility determinationdeposition testimony
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rogers v. Westfalia Associated Technologies, Inc.

Ronald Rogers, while performing maintenance, fell nine feet from a stationary conveyor system at Agway Feed Mill. He and his wife, Lisa Rogers, sued Westfalia Associated Technologies, Inc. and Portee, Inc., alleging negligent design and manufacturing, failure to warn, breach of warranty, and strict products liability. Westfalia, Portee, Probec, Inc., and Mill Technology, Inc. filed motions for summary judgment, arguing they owed no duty to Rogers and their products were not defective. The court found that Agway, the employer and purchaser, was in the best position to assess risks and declined optional safety equipment. Furthermore, Rogers was aware of the dangers, and warnings were posted. Consequently, the court granted all motions for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint, counterclaims, and cross-claims.

Product LiabilityNegligenceStrict LiabilityDesign DefectFailure to WarnSummary JudgmentConveyor SystemIndustrial AccidentAssumption of RiskOpen and Obvious Danger
References
17
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 02654
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 06, 2016

Matter of Dayannie I. M. (Roger I. M.)

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed a Family Court order which found Roger I.M. abused and neglected his daughter, Eyllen I.M., and derivatively abused his other children: Dayannie I.M., Hillary I.M., Keyri I.M., and Jackzenny I.M. The court found that the Suffolk County Department of Social Services presented sufficient evidence, including Eyllen's consistent out-of-court statements, expert testimony, and Roger I.M.'s written confession of sexual abuse. The Appellate Division upheld the Family Court's credibility assessment, rejecting the appellant's and the children's mother's disputes. The court also affirmed the derivative abuse findings for the other children, noting that a child's recantation does not necessarily invalidate prior abuse allegations, especially when pressured or if there is expert testimony indicating a false recantation.

Child AbuseChild NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewSexual AbuseCredibilityRecantationExpert TestimonyParental RightsSuffolk County Family Court
References
26
Case No. CV-23-1061
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Seosi Song

Claimant Seosi Song, an assistant plan examiner, appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that denied her claim for workers' compensation benefits. Song alleged that she sustained physical injuries to her back, right knee, and right wrist, as well as psychological injuries, due to working unusually prolonged hours in a static position from home since April 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge disallowed the claim, and the Board affirmed, finding that Song did not establish a causally-related occupational disease or accidental injury. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the medical evidence was insufficient to establish a recognizable link between Song's condition and a distinctive feature of her occupation, or that her injuries resulted from unusual environmental conditions. The court also found no error in the Board's decision to disregard speculative medical evidence regarding psychological injuries.

Occupational Disease ClaimAccidental Injury ClaimRemote Work InjuriesCausation Medical EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Board AffirmationAppellate Division DecisionPhysical Injury ClaimsMental Health ClaimsBurden of Proof ClaimantStatic Position Work
References
12
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 05361
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2024

Rogers v. Peter Scalamandre & Sons, Inc.

The plaintiff, Michael Rogers, an employee of Certified Interiors, Inc., sustained personal injuries at a construction site when a boom lift he was operating suddenly malfunctioned. Rogers initiated an action against Peter Scalamandre & Sons, Inc., the general contractor, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6). Scalamandre subsequently filed a third-party action against Certified for contractual indemnification and breach of contract for failure to procure insurance. The Supreme Court granted Rogers' motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) and largely denied other motions. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order by granting Certified's motion to dismiss the contractual indemnification claim, deeming it void under General Obligations Law § 5-322.1 due to Scalamandre's negligence, and otherwise affirmed the lower court's rulings.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentBoom Lift MalfunctionLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)General Obligations Law § 5-322.1Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewThird-Party Action
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Song v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.

Dr. Samuel Song was terminated by Ives Laboratories, Inc., leading him to file a discrimination charge with the EEOC, which was referred to the SDHR. The SDHR dismissed his complaint for administrative convenience. Song subsequently sued, alleging national origin discrimination under federal civil rights acts and the New York State Human Rights Law. The defendant moved for partial summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the Section 1981 claim and the state law claim. The court granted dismissal of the Section 1981 claim, applying the precedent of Patterson v. McLean Credit Union retroactively. However, the court denied the dismissal of the Human Rights Law claim, affirming that an administrative convenience dismissal by the SDHR preserves the right to sue and that exercising pendent jurisdiction was appropriate.

Employment DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationCivil Rights Act of 1866Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964New York State Human Rights LawRetroactive Application of LawPendent JurisdictionElection of RemediesAdministrative Convenience DismissalSummary Judgment
References
40
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 05610 [232 AD3d 1005]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2024

Matter of Song v. City of N.Y. Dept. of Bldgs.

Claimant Seosi Song appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied her claim for benefits. Song alleged physical and psychological injuries from working prolonged hours in a static position from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially disallowed the claim, a decision affirmed by the Board. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding insufficient competent medical evidence to establish a causally-related occupational disease or accidental injuries that developed over time. The court also found the medical evidence regarding psychological injuries to be unconvincing and speculative.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsOccupational DiseaseAccidental InjuryCausationMedical Evidence SufficiencyPsychological InjuriesWork-from-HomeClaim DenialAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Board Appeal
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rogers v. New York University

Susan Rogers sued her former employer, New York University (NYU), alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), New York State and City Human Rights Laws, and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Rogers, an administrative aide, experienced psychological difficulties and took two medical leaves in 1997. After exhausting her FMLA leave, NYU terminated her, citing a lack of written medical certification for her return to work. The court granted summary judgment to NYU on Rogers' FMLA claims, finding that her therapist's oral communications were insufficient certification. However, the court denied summary judgment on her ADA claims, ruling that there were triable issues of fact regarding whether an extended leave would have been a reasonable accommodation for her disability, given that NYU did not fill her position but used temporary workers during the requested six-week extension.

ADAFMLAdisability discriminationreasonable accommodationsummary judgmentextended leaveemployment lawwrongful terminationmental healthpost-traumatic stress disorder
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rogers v. New York City Transit Authority

James Rogers, a member of the Socialist Workers' Party, was fined $50 by the New York City Transit Authority for selling newspapers on a subway station platform, violating a rule against unauthorized commercial activity. Rogers challenged this, asserting free speech violations and arguing his activities were permitted. The trial court sided with Rogers, but the Appellate Division reversed, ruling the subway is not a public forum. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, concluding that subway stations are limited public forums subject to reasonable, content-neutral regulations. The Court upheld the Transit Authority's ban on sales activity, recognizing its legitimate interest in managing the transportation system for safety and efficiency.

First AmendmentFree SpeechPublic Forum DoctrineCommercial ActivitySubway StationPolitical CampaignExpressive ConductNew York City Transit AuthorityRegulationsAppellate Review
References
31
Case No. MON 0255649
Regular
Dec 27, 2007

IN SOON SONG vs. WINDSOR MANOR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied In Soon Song's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior finding that her psychiatric injury claim was barred by Labor Code section 3208.3(h). This section excludes claims substantially caused by lawful, non-discriminatory, good-faith personnel actions. The Board adopted the Judge's report, which detailed how Song's employment issues, including disciplinary actions and a workplace conflict investigation, constituted such actions. Defendant's request for sanctions was also denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDWINDSOR MANORMON 0255649LAO 0771737ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATIONPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code 5813sanctionsFindings and OrderLabor Code section 3208.3(h)
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 109 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