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

Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians & Employers' Pension Fund v. Steven Scott Enterprises, Inc.

Plaintiffs, the Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians and Employers’ Pension Fund, brought suit against Steven Scott Enterprises, Inc. seeking an audit of payroll records from 1992-1994 to verify pension fund contributions. Steven Scott moved for summary judgment, asserting that fifteen prior settlement agreements with William Moriarity, a Pension Fund Trustee and Local 802 President, fully settled all monetary claims. The court found that Steven Scott reasonably relied on Moriarity's apparent authority, and the Pension Fund's actions, including cashing checks and failing to repudiate the agreements, established equitable estoppel and ratification. Consequently, the court granted Steven Scott's motion for summary judgment, concluding that the Pension Fund was bound by the agreements and dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint.

ERISALMRAPension FundEquitable EstoppelApparent AuthorityRatificationSettlement AgreementsSummary JudgmentEmployer ContributionsUnion
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Patterson-Stevens, Inc. v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local Union No. 17

Patterson-Stevens (plaintiff) sought to vacate a July 24, 1995 judgment and amend its complaint against Local 17 (defendant). The original complaint sought an injunction to prevent arbitration of a grievance initiated by Local 17, which Patterson argued was untimely under a six-month statute of limitations. The court initially dismissed the case, lacking jurisdiction to issue an injunction. Patterson-Stevens then moved to vacate, arguing the complaint implicitly stated a claim for declaratory judgment. The court denied the motion, finding no clear error of law or manifest injustice in its prior decision. Furthermore, the proposed amendment for declaratory relief was deemed futile, as there was no legal precedent supporting a statute of limitations for grievance submission, unlike federal court actions.

Collective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ArbitrationStatute of LimitationsFederal JurisdictionInjunctive ReliefDeclaratory JudgmentMotion to Vacate JudgmentMotion to Amend ComplaintFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureNational Labor Relations Act
References
6
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 06534
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 12, 2020

Matter of Stevens v. Carey

The father, Robert Stevens, appealed from an order of the Family Court, Putnam County, entered August 23, 2019, which dismissed his petition to modify a prior order of custody and parental access. The Family Court had dismissed the petition without prejudice, awaiting a comprehensive substance abuse evaluation from the father. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that the father failed to demonstrate a sufficient change in circumstances to warrant a modification of the parental access arrangements and had not addressed his substance abuse and mental health issues.

Custody ModificationParental AccessFamily Court AppealSubstance Abuse EvaluationChange in CircumstancesBest Interests of the ChildAppellate DivisionDismissal Without PrejudiceChild Custody
References
8
Case No. 2007 NY Slip Op 27117
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 16, 2007

Matter of Frances W. v. Steven M.

Petitioner Frances W. sought child support from respondent Steven M. for her niece, Melissa M. The court denied the application, affirming prior findings by a Referee and another Judge that Ms. W. had improperly brainwashed Melissa into falsely believing her father sexually abused her, thereby destroying their relationship. The court applied the doctrine of collateral estoppel and cited Matter of Orange County Dept. of Social Servs. v Meehan, concluding that Ms. W. forfeited her right to child support due to her egregious conduct. The decision emphasized that Ms. W. should not profit from her own wrongdoing, but clarified that Melissa M. retains the right to file her own support or enforcement petition against her father.

Child SupportParental AlienationCollateral EstoppelFamily LawChild Abuse AllegationsCustody DisputeVisitation InterferenceJudicial DiscretionForensic PsychologyChild Welfare
References
19
Case No. 532577
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Steven Coll

Claimant Steven Coll sustained neck and left shoulder injuries in a 2016 work accident and received temporary partial disability benefits. He subsequently took a light-duty job as a school security officer but was laid off on June 30, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board ruled that Coll was not entitled to reduced earnings awards after this date because his job loss was unrelated to his work-related disability. The Appellate Division affirmed, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that Coll's unemployment was voluntary for workers' compensation purposes, as his disability did not cause or contribute to his separation from employment. The Court noted that his remedy would be unemployment insurance benefits.

Reduced Earnings AwardsVoluntary UnemploymentLabor Market WithdrawalCOVID-19 Impact on EmploymentWork-Related DisabilityCausation of UnemploymentWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionAppellate Division ReviewSubstantial Evidence StandardLight-Duty Employment
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stevens v. Barnhart

Plaintiff Patricia A. Stevens initiated a civil action to challenge the Administrative Law Judge's denial of her disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income claims. Stevens alleged disability due to various physical and mental conditions since May 2000. The court reviewed the ALJ's decision based on three main arguments from the plaintiff: improper evaluation of treating physician opinions, incorrect assessment of her residual functional capacity, and inadequate consideration of her subjective pain reports. The court found no reversible error, determining that the ALJ appropriately weighed all medical evidence and considered Stevens' subjective complaints. Consequently, the court affirmed the ALJ's decision, granted judgment to the defendant, and dismissed the plaintiff's case.

Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB)Supplemental Security Income (SSI)Social Security ActAdministrative Law Judge (ALJ)Residual Functional Capacity (RFC)Treating Physician RuleMedical Evidence ReviewSedentary WorkCredibility AssessmentVocational Expert Testimony
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 1984

Patricia L. v. Steven L.

This case involves an appeal challenging the Family Court's decision to compel a mother, Patricia L., to proceed pro se in a custody hearing after her lawyer failed to appear. The dispute originated from a divorce action between Patricia L. and Steven L., where both sought custody of their children. Despite the mother's protests and information that her lawyer was en route, the court proceeded with the hearing, leading to the mother's inability to effectively present her case. The Family Court subsequently awarded temporary and then permanent custody to the father, Steven L. The appellate court found that the mother was deprived of her fundamental right to counsel, which compromised her ability to ensure due process and protect the best interests of the children. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the Family Court's order and remitted the matter for a new hearing.

Right to counselCustody hearingPro se representationAdjournment denialParental rightsFamily Court procedureAppellate reviewAbuse of discretionDue processEffective assistance of counsel
References
20
Case No. ADJ226519 (SDO 0302236) ADJ488924 (SDO 0329999)
Regular
May 23, 2011

Craig Stevens vs. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, the applicant, Craig Stevens, sought removal of an order continuing his case to a mandatory settlement conference. Stevens contended entitlement to temporary disability and spinal surgery, and alleged ex parte communication with the Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME), Dr. Harvey Wieseltier, necessitating his disqualification. The Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, adopting the WCJ's report and noting the petition was not correctly verified. The underlying issues of medical treatment and temporary disability remain for future proceedings.

Petition for RemovalExpedited HearingMandatory Settlement ConferenceTemporary Disability IndemnitySpinal SurgeryAgreed Medical EvaluatorDisqualificationEx Parte CommunicationLine InstallerIndustrial Injuries
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Majewicz v. Malecki

Plaintiffs Steven R. Majewicz and Kelli A. Majewicz commenced a negligence and Labor Law action against Black Rock Roofing & Siding Co., Inc. after Steven R. Majewicz sustained injuries from falling through a roof while employed by Expert Personnel, Inc., a temporary work agency subcontracted by Black Rock. Black Rock moved for summary judgment, asserting that Majewicz was its 'special employee,' thereby making the action against it barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The Supreme Court granted Black Rock’s motion, and the appellate court unanimously affirmed this decision. The court concluded that a special employment relationship existed, emphasizing Black Rock’s control over Majewicz’s work, equipment, and materials, which was a significant factor in determining special employee status.

special employeeworkers' compensationsummary judgmentpersonal injuryLabor Lawroofing accidenttemporary agencynegligence actionemployer liabilityappellate review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 02, 1974

Stevens v. County of Nassau

Mozella Stevens, a food service worker for the County of Nassau, suffered a fractured right wrist after a fall on hospital grounds. She subsequently filed a medical malpractice action against her employer, the county, alleging permanent deformity due to the treatment received at the Nassau County Medical Center. The defendant appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, which denied its motion for summary judgment. The appellate court affirmed the order, determining that the plaintiff's action was not barred by the Workmen’s Compensation Law because the injury did not arise out of and in the course of her employment.

Medical MalpracticeSummary Judgment MotionOrder AffirmedWorkers' Compensation LawCourse of EmploymentFractured WristOrthopedic InjuryPlaintiff-Employer RelationshipJudicial AppealPersonal Injury
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 222 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