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
Feb 02, 1984

Krebbeks v. Regan

Petitioner, the widow of a Department of Transportation employee, applied for accidental death benefits after her husband's service-connected death in July 1981. Although her application for accidental death benefits was approved, these benefits were entirely offset by workers' compensation payments, leaving her with no current payments from the State Employees’ Retirement System. Subsequently, petitioner sought a lump-sum ordinary death benefit, which was denied because she was deemed eligible for accidental death benefits, even if offset. This appeal ensued after the denial of her application by a hearing officer and Special Term's concurrence. The court affirmed the denial, citing Retirement and Social Security Law § 60 (a) (3), which states an ordinary death benefit is not payable if an accidental death benefit is payable, with a narrow exception not applicable here.

Accidental Death BenefitsOrdinary Death BenefitsWorkers' Compensation OffsetRetirement and Social Security LawStatutory InterpretationDeath Benefits EligibilityPublic Employee BenefitsAdministrative Law AppealDeath Benefit Offset
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Umanzor v. General Telecom

This case involves an appeal from decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning death benefits following a decedent's death in the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks. The decedent's mother (claimant) sought workers’ compensation death benefits for herself and the decedent's minor half-siblings, asserting financial dependency. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found dependency and awarded benefits, but the Board reversed this finding, concluding that the record did not support the claim of dependency under Workers’ Compensation Law § 16 (4-a), while still awarding some benefits under § 16 (4-b). The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing numerous discrepancies and inconsistencies in the claimant's evidence regarding household expenses and the decedent's financial contributions, which made it impossible to determine if the loss had a detrimental effect, thus upholding the Board's finding of no dependency under § 16 (4-a).

Workers’ CompensationDeath BenefitsDependencyWorld Trade Center Attack9/11Financial ContributionSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewHousehold ExpensesFactual Finding
References
6
Case No. 528566
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Christine Kelly (Kelly, Kevin (dec'd)

Claimant Christine Kelly filed a claim for death benefits after her husband's death, alleging it was causally-related to his established asbestos-related occupational disease. Liability for the original disability claim had been transferred to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases in 2011. The employer argued the Special Fund should be liable for the death benefits claim. However, the Workers' Compensation Board and the Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed that the death benefits claim was a new and distinct claim, accruing at the time of death in 2016. Therefore, its transfer to the Special Fund was precluded by Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a (1-a), as the Special Fund closed to new applications effective January 1, 2014, a ruling supported by Matter of Verneau v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc. The decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, ruling that liability did not shift to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases, was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Law § 25-aSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesDeath Benefits ClaimOccupational DiseaseAsbestosisCausally Related DeathLiability TransferStatutory Cut-off DateAppellate DivisionThird Judicial Department
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Bowman v. Birdair, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding death benefits. Birdair, Inc. contracted to replace a roof and was required to use union labor. They initially used Colonial Rigging and Contracting as a labor broker but later directly contacted unions for workers. The decedent, hired directly by Birdair but placed on Colonial’s payroll, died on his first day from a work-related fall. His spouse filed a claim for death benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and subsequently the Board found that the decedent was a general employee of Colonial and a special employee of Birdair, holding Birdair 100% liable. Birdair and its carrier appealed. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s decision, finding substantial evidence that Birdair, by supplying tools, equipment, and directing work, had assumed control as a special employer.

Death Benefits ClaimEmployer Liability DisputeSpecial Employer DoctrineGeneral Employer DoctrineLabor BrokerageAppellate AffirmationSubstantial Evidence StandardWork-related FallConstruction IndustryUnion Labor Requirement
References
4
Case No. ADJ8007911
Regular
Dec 24, 2012

Matthew Maxwell (Deceased) vs. FIRECODE SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INC., OAK RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns appeals regarding workers' compensation death benefits for Matthew Maxwell's dependents. The primary dispute involves whether Matthew Maxwell Jr., the decedent's son, qualifies for the special minor death benefit under Labor Code section 4703.5, given his mother is a totally dependent spouse. The Appeals Board denied the daughter's petition for reconsideration and dismissed the insurer's petition as untimely, affirming the WCJ's award of the special minor benefit to Matthew Maxwell Jr. A commissioner dissented, arguing Matthew Maxwell Jr. is excluded from the benefit because his mother is a surviving totally dependent parent.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMatthew MaxwellFirecode Safety EquipmentOak River InsuranceADJ8007911ReconsiderationFindings and AwardTotally Dependent MinorLabor Code Section 3501Labor Code Section 4703.5
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2003

Beesmer v. Village of DeRuyter Fire Department

In 1975, the decedent, a volunteer firefighter, suffered a heart attack and continuously received workers' compensation benefits until his death in 2002. His claimant applied for death benefits, alleging a causal link between the 1975 injury and his death. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) awarded benefits after denying the employer's request for a second adjournment to depose treating physicians, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The court found substantial evidence supporting the causal relationship between the heart attack and death, noting that a work-related injury need not be the sole cause of death. Additionally, the court upheld the WCLJ's denial of the adjournment, as the employer failed to provide a sufficient excuse for not scheduling depositions or serving subpoenas during the initial adjournment period.

Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsCausal RelationshipHeart AttackCongestive Heart FailureAdjournment DenialTreating Physician DepositionSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewMedical OpinionVolunteer Firefighter
References
5
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 05369 [174 AD3d 1022]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 2019

Matter of Verneau v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc.

Claimant Frances Verneau's husband, the decedent, had an established workers' compensation claim for occupational diseases, with liability transferring to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases in December 2011. Following his death in 2017, claimant sought death benefits. Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially held the Special Fund liable, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, contending that Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a (1-a) barred the transfer of liability because the death claim arose after the 2014 statutory closure date for new applications. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Board's decision, stating that the 2013 amendment to Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a (1-a) was inapplicable as the original liability had transferred to the Special Fund in 2011, prior to the January 1, 2014, cut-off. The Court affirmed that where liability for a claim has already been transferred, the Special Fund remains liable for causally related death benefits.

Workers' Compensation LawOccupational DiseaseAsbestosisDeath Benefits ClaimSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesStatutory InterpretationAppellate DivisionTransfer of LiabilityWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionConsequential Death
References
7
Case No. ADJ8503725
Regular
Jan 09, 2017

DAVID LEZCHUK (Deceased), MELISSA LEZCHUK, Guardian ad Litem for MADISON GRACE LEZCHUK, minor vs. CAL FIRE—DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION, legally uninsured, administered by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration. The Board also denied the defendant's petition, upholding the finding that Madison Lezchuk, the minor dependent, is entitled to an additional death benefit of $53,000. This additional benefit is to be placed in a trust due to the applicant's spending habits and inability to manage funds, ensuring protection of Madison's future interests. The WCAB affirmed that the "good cause" exception under Labor Code section 4704 allows for such awards despite the applicant's receipt of a CALPERS Special Death Benefit.

CALPERSSpecial Death BenefitLabor Code section 4707Labor Code section 4704good causeminor dependentdeath benefitGuardian ad Litemindustrial injuryWCJ discretion
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zechmann v. Canisteo Volunteer Fire Department

This case addresses whether a claim by a surviving spouse for death benefits, traceable to a 1951 injury, is time-barred under New York's Workers' Compensation Law. The Special Fund for Reopened Cases argued for the application of

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesDeath Benefits ClaimTime-Barred ClaimStatute of LimitationsContinuing JurisdictionClosed Cases ReopeningDisability ClaimCausal RelationVolunteer Firemen's Benefit Law
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Dellauniversita v. Tek Precision Co.

The case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding a claim for death benefits. Claimant’s husband suffered a work-related injury in 1987 and later died. The claimant, as his widow, filed for death benefits. However, the claimant herself died before the causal relationship between her husband’s death and the 1987 incident could be established. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that her claim for death benefits abated upon her death. The appellate court affirmed this decision, citing precedents that claims for death benefits abate if a determination on the merits, such as causal relationship, has not been established prior to the claimant’s death.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsClaim AbatementCausal RelationshipAppellate ReviewProcedural IssuesPrecedentLegal Interpretation
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 8,412 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