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

Owens v. Parrinello

Paul Owens, a homeschooled student, sued Monroe Community College (MCC) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after they initially refused to issue him an associate's degree, citing a state regulation requiring a high school diploma or GED. Owens refused to obtain a GED, considering it a stigma. Although New York State regulations were later amended, and MCC subsequently granted him his degree, Owens pursued damages for tuition differences incurred after transferring to a private college. The court dismissed Owens' due process, discrimination, and equal protection claims, finding MCC's actions rational and compliant with state regulations. Furthermore, claims for injunctive relief were deemed moot due to the issuance of the degree. Owens' state law claim and the defendants' cross-claim were also dismissed.

HomeschoolingAssociate's DegreeDue ProcessEqual ProtectionDiscriminationMootness DoctrineDamages ClaimProperty InterestAcademic StandardsConstitutional Rights
References
36
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
Jun 30, 2009

Owens v. City of New York

Plaintiff William A. Owens, a maintenance worker, sustained injuries after falling from a ladder while repairing a door's locking mechanism within the New York City school system. He subsequently initiated legal action against the City of New York and the New York City Department of Education, asserting a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied Owens' motion for summary judgment on liability and granted the defendants' cross-motion to dismiss the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim. The court determined that Owens' activity constituted routine maintenance, not a protected activity under the statute. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the defendants had established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentRoutine MaintenanceLabor Law 240(1)Summary JudgmentAffirmation of OrderWorkplace InjuryStatutory LiabilityDefendants' Cross MotionPlaintiff's Appeal
References
2
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
Mar 26, 1997

Feltt v. Owens

This case involves a personal injury and wrongful death action filed by the wife of David J. Feltt (decedent) after he died in a construction accident involving a concrete bomb shelter removal. The plaintiff sought workers' compensation benefits and subsequently sued the homeowners (James R. Owens and Cari A. Owens) and contractors (Harlow Excavating and Contracting, Inc. and Yanbar, Inc.) under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to all defendants. On appeal, the court affirmed this decision. It found the homeowners not liable due to the one-family dwelling exemption and lack of direction/control over the work. Yanbar, deemed the decedent's employer by the Workers' Compensation Board, was shielded from liability under Workers' Compensation Law § 11, as the Board's determination was binding. Harlow was also found not to be a general contractor, lacking supervisory control over the worksite, and thus not amenable to suit under the Labor Law provisions.

Workers' CompensationLabor LawWrongful DeathSummary JudgmentAppellate DecisionConstruction AccidentOwner LiabilityContractor LiabilityOne-Family Dwelling ExemptionEmployer Immunity
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gallin v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.

Plaintiff moved to set aside a jury verdict in an asbestos-related wrongful death and product liability case against Owens-Illinois, Inc., the sole remaining defendant after five others had settled. The jury had allocated percentages of liability to Owens-Illinois and the settling co-defendants, Eagle-Picher and Keene Corporation. Plaintiff argued that the jury's allocation of liability to the settling defendants was unwarranted by the evidence. The court, applying a strict standard for overturning jury verdicts, reviewed the trial record and found sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings regarding exposure to the settling co-defendants' asbestos products. Consequently, the court denied the plaintiff's motion to set aside the verdict.

Asbestos ExposureWrongful Death ClaimProduct LiabilityJury Verdict ChallengePost-Trial MotionsNew York General Obligations LawComparative FaultRule 50(b)Settling DefendantsApportionment of Liability
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 265 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