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

In re Tanya T.

This case concerns an appeal from an Albany County Family Court order which adjudicated four children, Tanya T., Tabitha T., Deion T., and Davonna T., as abused and/or neglected. The petition alleged that their father sexually molested Davonna in Deion’s presence. The Family Court issued orders of supervision and protection, mandating treatment for the father and prohibiting visitation. On appeal, the court affirmed the Family Court’s findings, determining that the children's out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated by behavioral changes, expert testimony, and consistent statements. The appellate court also upheld the denial of the father's visitation petition, concluding it was not in the children's best interests due to their fear and the father's history of violence.

Child AbuseChild NeglectSexual MolestationCorroboration of Child StatementsBehavioral ChangesExpert TestimonyDenial of VisitationBest Interests of the ChildFamily Court ActAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 26, 2006

In re John T.

Holliswood Care Center appealed an order awarding attorneys' fees against it in a guardianship proceeding for John T. The Supreme Court had initially found John T. competent but awarded fees to the petitioner, temporary guardian, and Mental Hygiene Legal Service, citing Holliswood's "reprehensible actions" in detaining Mr. T. Holliswood argued it was not given notice that the guardianship hearing would determine attorney's fees against it and was not afforded an opportunity to present evidence regarding its actions, which it claimed were based on safety concerns, not Mr. T.'s competency. The appellate court reversed the order, holding that the Supreme Court improperly proceeded with the hearing and improvidently awarded attorneys' fees without proper notice and opportunity to be heard for Holliswood. Furthermore, the court found that the award of attorneys' fees against Holliswood was not authorized by Mental Hygiene Law article 81 nor justified under common law exceptions.

GuardianshipAttorneys' FeesMental Hygiene LawIncapacitated PersonAppellate ProcedureDue ProcessNotice RequirementNursing Home DetentionElderly CareCompetency Evaluation
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

B.T. v. D.M.

The petitioner, B.T., sought to extend an order of protection against her husband, respondent D.M., and alleged a violation of a previous order. D.M. counter-petitioned for visitation with their child. The court denied B.T.'s violation petition, finding insufficient evidence that D.M. orchestrated his older son's actions. However, B.T.'s request to extend the order of protection was granted for two additional years, citing D.M.'s history of severe domestic violence against B.T. (witnessed by the child) and continued harassment including stalking and threatening phone calls even after the initial order. D.M.'s petition for visitation was denied based on the child's best interests; a forensic evaluator reported the child suffered trauma from witnessing the violence and opposed visitation, noting forcing visits could worsen the child's high anxiety and fearfulness. The court found D.M.'s testimony not credible and supported the forensic evaluator's assessment.

Domestic ViolenceOrder of ProtectionChild VisitationChild CustodyForensic PsychologyChild TraumaParental BehaviorBest Interests of the ChildHarassmentStalking
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Jack T.

This case involves an appeal concerning a mentally incompetent juvenile, Jack T., who faced multiple delinquency petitions. After being found incompetent and dangerous, Family Court Judges remanded him to the Commissioner of Mental Hygiene. The Appellate Division reversed, ruling that Family Court could not commit a mentally retarded juvenile under CPL article 730 and required adherence to Mental Hygiene Law procedures. Following remand, a new hearing assessed Jack T.'s competency and need for involuntary care. Medical examiners concluded Jack T. remained incompetent to stand trial but was no longer a danger to himself or the community and did not require involuntary commitment. Judge Gibbell, presiding, highlighted a legislative oversight, concluding that without certification under the Mental Hygiene Law or the ability to use CPL 730.50, the Family Court's hands are tied, rendering it unable to act in such cases, and strongly urged legislative reform.

Juvenile DelinquencyMental IncompetenceFamily CourtHabeas CorpusCPL Article 730Mental Hygiene LawDue ProcessInvoluntary CommitmentLegislative ReformJudicial Discretion
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Gunner T.

This case concerns a child neglect petition against Maria T. regarding her son, Gunner T., who was placed in the care of the Clinton County Department of Social Services. The Department issued a notice to remove Gunner from his current foster home and place him with his great-uncle. The Attorney for the Child subsequently filed a motion to modify the existing order, advocating for Gunner to remain in his current foster home, citing his best interests. The court, presided over by Timothy J. Lawliss, ruled that it indeed possesses the legal authority under the Family Court Act to direct the placement of a child in a specific foster home. A separate hearing will be scheduled to determine if the requested relief aligns with Gunner's best interests.

Child NeglectFoster Care PlacementBest Interest of ChildFamily Court ActJudicial AuthoritySpecific Foster Home PlacementMotion to Modify OrderDepartment of Social ServicesAttorney for the ChildRelative Placement Preference
References
3
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 08510
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 21, 2019

Franklin v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.

The plaintiff, Mark Franklin, brought an action against T-Mobile USA, Inc. and Dyckman Realty Associates L.P. T-Mobile and Dyckman Realty then filed a third-party action against Energy Design Service Systems, LLC, seeking contractual indemnification. The Supreme Court, New York County, denied T-Mobile and Dyckman Realty's motion for summary judgment on their indemnification claim. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed this decision, finding that issues of fact regarding the negligence of the defendants/third-party plaintiffs precluded summary judgment.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentNegligenceDangerous ConditionPremises LiabilityThird-Party ActionAppellate Division First DepartmentLabor LawDuty to Keep Premises SafeNotice of Hazard
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re T. Children

The Family Court of Bronx County dismissed neglect petitions brought by the Commissioner of Social Services against the respondent mother, Betty T. The appellate court unanimously reversed this decision, finding that the Family Court erred in its assessment of witness credibility, specifically discrediting the petitioner's expert witnesses and homemakers while fully crediting the respondent's testimony. Evidence presented included the mother's pattern of placing and reclaiming children from foster care, causing instability, and instances of physical abuse, such as stuffing a T-shirt into a child's mouth and handling another roughly. The case has been remanded for a new fact-finding hearing before a different Family Court Judge to better determine the children's best interests.

Child NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewFact-Finding HearingReversalRemandEvidentiary ErrorWitness CredibilityCorporal PunishmentFoster Care
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Appointment of a Kinship Guardian

This case involves a kinship guardianship petition filed by foster parent T.H. for L.N.G.'s children, N. and T., after years in foster care. The court found a systematic and catastrophic failure by the Family Court and the foster care system to recognize and address severe parental alienation against the biological father, L.N.G. Despite L.N.G.'s diligent efforts for reunification and the dismissal of previous termination of parental rights proceedings against him, the children's minds were poisoned against him by the biological mother and acquiesced in by the foster mother. The court reluctantly granted the kinship guardianship to T.H. due to no other viable placement, but imposed strict conditions aimed at rectifying the parental alienation and ensuring L.N.G.'s involvement in his children's lives. These conditions include providing L.N.G. with T.H.'s address, keeping him apprised of the children's whereabouts, consulting him on educational decisions, enrolling the children in therapy for parental alienation, and facilitating visitation with L.N.G. as recommended by the therapist.

Parental AlienationKinship GuardianshipFoster Care System FailureTermination of Parental RightsChild CustodyFamily ReunificationJudicial DiscretionExpert TestimonyChild Protective ServicesCourt Orders with Conditions
References
9
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 07763 [176 AD3d 1160]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2019

Bruno v. T-Mobile, USA, Inc.

The plaintiff, Randal Bruno, a maintenance technician, sustained injuries when he tripped on a "step-over" on a roof leased by T-Mobile, USA, Inc. He initiated a consolidated action against T-Mobile and its predecessor, Omnipoint Communications, Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law § 200. The Supreme Court, Kings County, granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissing these causes of action. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that the defendants established prima facie that the step-over was not a dangerous condition and that they lacked actual or constructive notice of any defect. The court further determined that the plaintiff's expert affidavit, relying on inapplicable code provisions, was insufficient to create a triable issue of fact.

Premises liabilitySummary judgmentNegligenceLabor Law § 200Appellate DivisionDangerous conditionNotice requirementPersonal injuryWorkplace accidentAffirmed decision
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Darlene T.

The Family Court of Onondaga County adjudicated Darlene T. a neglected child due to the mother's unsafe conduct, including leaving the child unattended and entertaining male companions overnight. Following a dispositional hearing, the court remanded the child to the mother's custody under supervision and conditions. The petitioner appealed, arguing that the Family Court erred by not making an express finding regarding the child's best interests or the mother's fitness. The appellate court found the Family Court's order equivocal regarding the mother's fitness and erred in excluding testimony about the mother's post-petition conduct, which was relevant to her fitness. The order was reversed, and the matter remitted for further proceedings to include additional evidence and findings on the child's best interests.

Child neglectFamily lawCustodyParental rightsBest interests of the childAppellate reviewDispositional hearingEvidence exclusionMaternal fitnessAbuse of discretion
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 395 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