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. ADJ10574278
Regular
Oct 08, 2018

SERGIO GUTIERREZ vs. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION CONCEPTS, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the previous decision, and returned the case for further development of the record. The WCAB found the prior judge erred in solely attributing the applicant's temporary disability to the defendant, Structural Alternative Solution Concepts. Medical evidence suggests the applicant may have sustained multiple cumulative injuries during subsequent employment. The WCAB mandates a review of potential consolidation of cases and requires medical evaluators to provide an analysis regarding the number and causation of injuries.

Cumulative injuryPetition for reconsiderationAgreed medical evaluatorTemporary disabilityCausationIndustrial injuryLeft elbowLeft bicep tendonLeft shoulderLow back
References
12
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 04941 [208 AD3d 412]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 16, 2022

Ruisech v. Structure Tone Inc.

This personal injury action arises from a construction site accident where plaintiff, an A-Val Architectural Metal III, LLC employee, slipped on pebbles. The Appellate Division, First Department, reviewed the Supreme Court's order. The appellate court modified the lower court's decision, granting summary judgment to several defendants (Park, CBRE, and Structure Tone Inc.) on claims related to Labor Law §§ 241(6) and 200, and common-law negligence. The court determined that the Industrial Code regulations cited were inapplicable and that the defendants lacked supervisory control over the injury-producing work. Additionally, the court ruled on various contractual indemnification claims, finding certain indemnification clauses enforceable while others were not due to ambiguity or lack of negligence.

Construction AccidentLabor LawIndustrial CodeSummary JudgmentIndemnificationContractual IndemnificationCommon Law NegligenceWorkers' Compensation LawPersonal InjuryAppellate Review
References
14
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05941
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 29, 2025

Grala v. Structural Preserv. Sys., LLC

This case involves a consolidated action for personal injuries filed by Pawel Grala and his wife against Structural Preservation Systems, LLC (Structural) and New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA). Structural subsequently filed a third-party action against Apex Development, Inc. (Grala's employer) and Maciej Witczak. The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, concerning motions for summary judgment on claims of contractual and common-law indemnification, breach of contract for failure to procure insurance, and Apex's counterclaims. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order by granting summary judgment to the third-party defendants on the cause of action alleging breach of contract for failure to procure insurance against Apex. In all other respects, the Supreme Court's order, which denied other branches of the third-party defendants' motion and granted the cross-motion to dismiss Apex's counterclaims, was affirmed.

Personal InjuryWorksite AccidentSummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationCommon-Law IndemnificationBreach of ContractFailure to Procure InsuranceGrave InjuryWorkers' Compensation LawLabor Law
References
22
Case No. 12 Civ. 8456
Regular Panel Decision

Residents for Sane Trash Solutions, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

Plaintiffs, including Residents for Sane Trash Solutions, Inc. and Micah Z. Kellner, challenged the construction of the 91st Street Marine Transfer Station (MTS) in New York City. They alleged that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) improperly issued a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit by failing to conduct an adequate environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), consider alternatives, or sufficiently address impacts after Superstorm Sandy. Additionally, Plaintiffs claimed the City of New York and its Department of Sanitation denied them equal protection, and Asphalt Green Inc. alleged breach of contract, trespass, and private nuisance. The District Court granted summary judgment to the Defendants, affirming that the Corps’ permit issuance was rational, its environmental review was adequate, and its considerations of alternatives, mitigation, and post-Sandy impacts were sufficient. All of Plaintiffs' claims, including constitutional and state law claims, were dismissed with prejudice.

Environmental LawClean Water Act (CWA)National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)Waste ManagementMarine Transfer StationJudicial ReviewAdministrative Procedure Act (APA)Summary JudgmentFlood RiskSuperstorm Sandy
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bardouille v. Structure-Tone, Inc.

Thomas Bardouille and his wife appealed orders from the Supreme Court, Kings County, after Thomas was injured in an electrical explosion. The initial Supreme Court decision had granted summary judgment dismissing their complaint, which alleged violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241(6) and common-law negligence against various defendants including building owners, managing agents, and contractors. The appellate court modified the initial order, finding triable issues of fact concerning direction and control and the applicability of Industrial Code regulation 12 NYCRR 23-1.13(b)(4), thereby reinstating certain claims against Structure-Tone, Inc., Deutsche Bank, Tishman Speyer Trammell Crow Limited Partnership, and Tishman Speyer Properties, Inc. The appeal also addressed a third-party action against Bardouille's employer, Ohm Electric, partially dismissing contribution and indemnification claims under Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 due to the absence of "grave injury" but affirming contractual claims. The appeal from an order denying reargument was dismissed, and the initial order was modified and affirmed in part.

Personal injuryLabor Lawsummary judgmentnegligenceappellate reviewconstruction accidentelectrical explosionindemnificationcontributiontriable issue of fact
References
4
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00338 [168 AD3d 1249]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 2019

Matter of Cerobski v. Structural Preserv. Sys.

Claimant Marek Cerobski filed for workers' compensation following a workplace injury in June 2015 to his right leg and back. The employer and carrier (Structural Preservation Systems) failed to timely file a prehearing conference statement, leading to preclusion from raising defenses, including a later-asserted fraud claim under Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found the claimant had committed fraud, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, determining that the carrier's fraud claim was untimely and defenses were waived due to their procedural defaults. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that the carrier's failure to file the required prehearing statement and demonstrate good cause for delay resulted in a proper waiver and preclusion of its defenses, including the fraud allegation and relitigation of established issues like accident and notice.

Workers' Compensation LawPrehearing Conference StatementWaiver of DefensesFraud ClaimCausal RelationshipAccident and NoticeCollateral EstoppelRes JudicataAppellate ReviewAdministrative Law
References
6
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02518
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 19, 2022

Peters v. Structure Tone, Inc.

Plaintiff Nedroy Peters, a carpenter, suffered an eye injury from falling concrete debris while working on a construction site managed by Structure Tone, Inc. and owned by MI NY Clock Tower, LLC. He filed claims under Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The Supreme Court initially granted plaintiff summary judgment on liability, but the Appellate Division, First Department, modified this. The Appellate Division denied plaintiff's summary judgment motion, finding unresolved issues of fact concerning the application of Labor Law § 240 (1) regarding elevation differential and debris force, and for Labor Law § 241 (6) regarding normal exposure to falling objects and the reasonableness of protective coverings. Therefore, the case will proceed further to resolve these factual disputes.

Construction AccidentFalling DebrisLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Industrial Code ViolationsSummary JudgmentElevation DifferentialEye InjuryRetinal DetachmentWorker Safety
References
14
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 06204
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2016

Seales v. Trident Structural Corp.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed appeals and cross-appeals from two Supreme Court orders regarding summary judgment motions in a personal injury action. Plaintiff, Seonn Seales, was injured by falling sheetrock while installing a sprinkler system. The court affirmed the denial of plaintiff's Labor Law § 240(1) motion, finding the sheetrock was not being hoisted or secured. It modified the Supreme Court orders, granting summary judgment to the owners on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 200, and common-law negligence claims, but denied summary judgment to the contractor, Trident Structural Corp., on Labor Law §§ 241(6), 200, and common-law negligence, citing triable issues of fact regarding its agency status and creation of the dangerous condition. The court also found unresolved issues of fact concerning contractual and common-law indemnification claims between the owners and Trident.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentFalling ObjectSummary JudgmentLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Labor Law § 200Common-Law NegligenceIndemnificationAppellate Review
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 17, 2011

Avrio Group Surveillance Solutions, Inc. v. Essex Insurance

Plaintiff Avrio Group Surveillance Solutions commenced a declaratory judgment action against Defendant Essex Insurance Company, seeking an order to defend and indemnify Avrio in a personal injury action. Essex filed a motion to dismiss, which was converted to a motion for summary judgment. The court addressed two main exclusions: the Completed Operations Exclusion and the Contractual Liability Exclusion. The court found a potentiality of coverage under the Completed Operations Exclusion due to ambiguities in the term "intended use" and unresolved factual issues regarding the completion of work, denying summary judgment on this ground. However, the court granted summary judgment in favor of Essex regarding the Contractual Liability Exclusion, as the subcontract did not qualify as an "insured contract" under the policy's specific definition in effect at the time of the incident, and Avrio was presumed to have agreed to these terms. The case will proceed to an evidentiary hearing on the Completed Operations Exclusion.

Insurance CoverageDeclaratory JudgmentSummary JudgmentContractual Liability ExclusionCompleted Operations ExclusionInsurance Policy InterpretationChoice of LawMaryland Contract LawFederal Civil ProcedureDuty to Defend
References
37
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 03683 [218 AD3d 446]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 05, 2023

Gamez v. New Line Structures & Dev., LLC

The plaintiff Carlos J. Gamez, a carpenter, sustained injuries after falling through an unmarked and unsecured hole on a work deck during construction. He and his wife commenced an action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1) against New Line Structures & Development, LLC, Hallets Building 1 SPE, LLC, and Hallets Astoria, LLC. The plaintiffs moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability, which the Supreme Court, Queens County, denied. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the defendants raised a triable issue of fact regarding whether Gamez's own conduct was the sole proximate cause of his injuries, despite the plaintiffs' prima facie showing of a Labor Law § 240 (1) violation.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor Law § 240(1)Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewProximate CauseComparative NegligenceFall ProtectionSafety DevicesPremises Liability
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 976 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