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
Jan 04, 2000

New York State Thruway Authority v. CBE Contracting Corp.

This case involves an indemnification action initiated by the owner of a construction project, the New York State Thruway Authority, against a subcontractor. The action arose from personal injuries sustained by a laborer. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and this decision was subsequently affirmed. The defendant's contention that the amendment substituting the New York State Thruway Authority as plaintiff violated due process was rejected by the court. Furthermore, the court found no genuine issues of fact regarding the plaintiff's supervisory control, determining that the laborer was a special employee of the defendant and that the defendant was judicially estopped from asserting otherwise due to a prior action where it successfully argued exclusive control.

Construction accidentIndemnificationSummary judgmentDue processStandingSpecial employeeJudicial estoppelScaffold collapsePersonal injurySubcontractor negligence
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

M.G.M. Insulation, Inc. v. Gardner

R-J Taylor General Contractors, Inc. and its subcontractors challenged a determination by the Department of Labor's Bureau of Public Work, which found their fire station construction project subject to prevailing wage requirements under Labor Law § 220. The Bureau concluded that the Bath Volunteer Fire Department (BVFD), despite being a not-for-profit corporation, functioned as a municipal department, and the fire station construction was a public work project. Petitioners initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge this determination. The court affirmed the Department of Labor's finding, concluding there was substantial evidence that BVFD was the functional equivalent of a municipal corporation and that the project served a public benefit. Consequently, the prevailing wage requirements were applicable, and the petition was dismissed.

Prevailing Wage LawPublic Work ProjectMunicipal CorporationFire Protection ServicesNot-for-Profit CorporationLabor Law § 220CPLR Article 78Functional EquivalencyState Environmental Quality Review ActConstruction Contract
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brooks v. Judlau Contracting, Inc.

This appeal addresses whether General Obligations Law § 5-322.1 permits a partially negligent general contractor to enforce an indemnification provision against its subcontractor for damages attributable to the subcontractor's negligence. The plaintiff, Stephen J. Brooks, an ironworker employed by subcontractor Thunderbird Constructors, Inc., sustained injuries and sued the general contractor, Judlau Contracting, Inc. Judlau asserted a third-party claim for contractual indemnification against Thunderbird, which was initially dismissed by lower courts on the grounds that Judlau's partial negligence precluded indemnification under the statute. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statute does permit such indemnification as long as the provision does not seek to indemnify the general contractor for its own negligence, but only for that portion attributable to the subcontractor. The court clarified that the phrase 'to the fullest extent permitted by law' limits the subcontractor's obligation to its own negligence, thereby enforcing the indemnification provision and remitting the case for further proceedings.

IndemnificationSubcontractor LiabilityGeneral Contractor NegligenceConstruction AccidentGeneral Obligations LawWorkers' Compensation LawContractual IndemnificationPartial NegligenceHold Harmless ClauseThird-Party Claim
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Krawczyk v. Ehrenfeld

This case involves an appeal by Kanfer General Contracting, Inc., and a cross-appeal by Paz Mast Construction, Inc., from a Supreme Court order that denied their respective cross-motions for summary judgment. The initial action concerned personal injuries. Kanfer, a subcontractor, sought dismissal of a second third-party complaint and all cross claims against it. Paz Mast, the general contractor, pursued conditional summary judgment for common-law indemnification against Roth Metal & Glass Works, Inc., the subcontractor employing the injured plaintiff. The Appellate Court reversed the lower court's decision, granting both Kanfer's and Paz Mast's cross-motions. The court reiterated that a general contractor, not supervising or controlling an injured subcontractor's employee's work, is entitled to full common-law indemnification from a negligent subcontractor.

Summary JudgmentCommon-Law IndemnificationLabor LawPersonal InjurySubcontractor LiabilityGeneral Contractor LiabilityAppellate ProcedureCross-MotionThird-Party ComplaintConstruction Site Accident
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2011

Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund v. Ramer

The plaintiff insurer moved for summary judgment seeking $161,776.75 in unpaid workers' compensation premiums. Defendants disputed the audit, claiming improper billing for two subcontractor employees and misclassification of one of their own employees. The court found that the subcontractor employees were correctly billed as they were explicitly excluded from the subcontractor's policy. Furthermore, the court determined that defendants had failed to exhaust administrative remedies regarding the misclassification argument, making it inappropriate for judicial review. Consequently, the Supreme Court's denial of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was reversed on appeal, and the motion was granted.

Workers' Compensation InsurancePremium DisputesSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewAdministrative RemediesEmployee MisclassificationSubcontractor LiabilityInsurance AuditsContract InterpretationJudicial Review
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 1998

Pope v. Supreme-K.R.W. Construction Corp.

Alston Pope, a carpenter, was injured by a falling beam on a construction site in Brooklyn and sued the general contractor, building owner, and subcontractor under Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court granted Pope summary judgment on liability and partially granted the general contractor/owner summary judgment on indemnity against the subcontractor. On appeal, the court affirmed Pope's liability finding and the general contractor/owner's entitlement to common-law and contractual indemnity. However, the order was modified to include attorney's fees, expenses, costs, and disbursements in the indemnification owed by the subcontractor to the general contractor and building owner.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor LawIndemnityContractual IndemnityCommon-Law IndemnitySummary JudgmentAttorney's FeesSubcontractor LiabilityGeneral Contractor Liability
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 29, 2005

Goncalves v. 515 Park Avenue Condominium

This case concerns an appeal from an order that granted summary judgment dismissing a claim for contractual indemnification. The action stemmed from personal injuries sustained by a worker at a construction site. Second third-party plaintiff Hird Blaker, Inc. (subcontractor) sought indemnification from second third-party defendant Woodworks Construction Company, Inc. (sub-subcontractor and the worker's employer). The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the unsigned purchase order between Hird Blaker and Woodworks did not incorporate the indemnification provisions of a separate trade subcontract by reference. The court emphasized that incorporation clauses in subcontracts typically bind subcontractors only to provisions related to the scope, quality, character, and manner of work.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentConstruction LawSubcontractor AgreementIncorporation by ReferencePersonal InjuryAppellate DivisionNew York LawInsurance CoverageScope of Work
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 05, 1996

Zeigler-Bonds v. Structure Tone, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from an order related to a personal injury claim on a construction site. The plaintiff, an employee of an electrical subcontractor, sustained injuries after slipping on a greasy substance and falling down stairs. The initial order denied the subcontractor's motion for summary judgment but granted the general contractor's cross-motion for contractual indemnification. The appellate court modified this decision, affirming the denial of the subcontractor's motion due to remaining factual issues regarding negligence under Labor Law, but denying the general contractor's cross-motion. The denial of the general contractor's motion was based on unresolved questions of its own negligence and the enforceability of the indemnity clause under General Obligations Law § 5-322.1.

Summary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationConstruction Site InjurySlip and FallNegligenceLabor LawAppellate DivisionThird-Party ComplaintGeneral Contractor LiabilitySubcontractor Liability
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Quantom Corporate Funding, Ltd. v. Westway Industries Inc.

The New York Court of Appeals addressed whether State Finance Law § 137 permits subcontractors' assignees, such as factors, to recover payments from bond sureties. The Court held that the statute should be interpreted to allow such assignments, thereby enabling assignees to sue on the payment bonds. This decision was based on the general principle of claim transferability and the legislative intent to protect workers, material suppliers, and subcontractors on public works projects. The Court rejected arguments from the surety that allowing assignments would increase risk or contradict the statute's purpose, emphasizing that assignees merely stand in the shoes of the subcontractors. The judgment affirmed the Appellate Division's reversal of a lower court's dismissal, resolving a conflict between appellate departments.

Subcontractor paymentPayment bondState Finance Law § 137Assignability of claimsAccounts receivable factoringSurety liabilityPublic works projectsLegislative intentNew York Court of AppealsAppellate Division conflict
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 05, 2007

North Country Insurance v. Jandreau

This appeal concerns an insurer's motion for summary judgment, seeking a declaration that it is not obligated to defend or indemnify a general contractor in a personal injury lawsuit. The underlying action arose when an employee of a roofing subcontractor fell from a roof on a construction site. The insurer disclaimed coverage, alleging the general contractor failed to provide timely notice of the occurrence as per the policy. However, the general contractor claimed a good-faith belief of non-liability, citing the subcontractor's responsibility, notification to the subcontractor's insurer, and the injured worker's disregard for instructions not to access the roof. The Supreme Court denied the insurer's motion, determining that the reasonableness of the general contractor's delayed notice was a factual question suitable for a jury, a decision which the appellate court affirmed.

Insurance CoverageTimely NoticeSummary JudgmentGood-Faith Belief of NonliabilityAppellate ReviewConstruction AccidentGeneral ContractorSubcontractor LiabilityDuty to DefendDuty to Indemnify
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 403 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