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

Onondaga Commercial Dry Wall Corp. v. 150 Clinton Street, Inc.

This case concerns the conflict between two classes of claimants, lienors under Article 2 of the Lien Law and trust beneficiaries under Article 3-A (the United States and the State of New York with tax claims), over a $23,000 balance due from an owner on a contract for the construction of apartment buildings. The fund was deposited into court under Lien Law § 55 in prior lien foreclosure actions. The Special Term initially favored the lienors, denying the U.S.'s application to enjoin foreclosure, but the Appellate Division reversed, granting the injunction and seemingly prioritizing tax claims. The Court of Appeals, interpreting the Lien Law, determined that Article 3-A provisions were intended to supplement, not supersede, older mechanic's lien provisions, especially regarding funds paid into court under section 55. The court held that such funds take the place of the property, making lien claims against them akin to claims against the property itself, which are not subject to tax claims under the statute. Therefore, the court reversed the Appellate Division's order and reinstated the Special Term's order, granting priority to the lienors.

Lien LawTrust FundMechanic's LiensTax ClaimsStatutory InterpretationFund PriorityForeclosure ActionsConstruction ContractArticle 2 Lien LawArticle 3-A Lien Law
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Psaty & Fuhrman, Inc. v. New York State Tax Commission

Petitioner, a general contracting firm involved in the construction of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza, faced a personal income tax assessment for additional payments made to 16 employees. These payments, characterized as per diem living and travel allowances, did not have New York State income taxes withheld. The State Tax Commission, after an audit and hearing, ruled these were supplemental wages subject to withholding tax, not reimbursements. Petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, bearing the burden of proof, to challenge this determination. The court, noting the payments lacked a fixed formula and some recipients lived locally, found the respondent acted reasonably. The determination was confirmed, and the petition dismissed.

Personal Income TaxWithholding TaxSupplemental WagesPer Diem PaymentsTravel AllowanceLodging AllowanceCPLR Article 78Burden of ProofTax DeficiencyState Tax Commission
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ormsby Haulers, Inc. v. Tully

The case involves Ormsby Haulers, Inc., Kenneth Ormsby, and Raymond Ormsby challenging a sales and use tax assessment imposed by the State Tax Commission. The Sales Tax Bureau determined that the use of the Ormsby brothers’ personally owned tractors for corporate purposes constituted a taxable rental to the corporation. Petitioners argued that possession of the tractors was not transferred, as each vehicle remained under the individual owner's complete control. However, the commission's construction of 'rental' was deemed reasonable, and the court found a rational basis to conclude that a 'transfer of possession' took place due to the brothers' integral roles and the tractors' use for corporate purposes. Consequently, the determination to uphold the sales tax assessment was confirmed, and the petition dismissed.

Sales Tax AssessmentUse TaxCorporate StructureTractor RentalConstructive PossessionTax Law InterpretationArticle 78 ProceedingJudicial Review of Agency DeterminationBusiness Entity TaxationTransfer of Possession
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Millstone Investment & Management, L.L.C. v. BNC Retax, L.L.C.

Millstone Investment & Management, L.L.C. appealed the trial court's denial of its summary judgment motion and the granting of BNC Retax, L.L.C.'s cross-motion. The dispute centered on the validity of tax liens transferred from taxing units (Alief Independent School District and Harris County) to RETax Funding L.P., BNC's predecessor, after TTSF, L.P. # 2 failed to pay property taxes. Millstone argued the liens were invalid because the tax collectors' certificates were not sworn affidavits as required by Texas Tax Code Ann. § 32.06, referencing the Texas Government Code's definition of 'affidavit.' The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that section 32.06(b) did not require the tax collectors to swear to the veracity of their certifications, interpreting the term 'affidavit' in that context as a unique document not subject to the general Government Code definition, especially given the option to attach a seal or sign before a notary.

Tax Lien TransferSummary JudgmentStatutory ConstructionTexas Tax CodeAffidavit InterpretationProperty ForeclosureDelinquent TaxesTax Collector CertificationDeed of TrustAppellate Review
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Menin v. Tully

The petitioner, an estate planner and life insurance agent, sought to review a State Tax Commission determination sustaining a deficiency assessment for unincorporated business taxes for various years between 1964 and 1974. The respondent concluded that the petitioner was an independent contractor rather than an employee. Petitioner worked under an agent’s career contract for New England Life Insurance Company and its general agent, but also sold insurance for other principals and operated with considerable independence, including maintaining his own office and incurring substantial business expenses. The court affirmed the determination, finding substantial evidence to support the conclusion that the petitioner was an independent contractor and therefore subject to the unincorporated business tax.

unincorporated business taxindependent contractorinsurance agentState Tax Commissiontax assessmentCPLR Article 78employer controlbusiness expensestax deficiencyappellate review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rosenbloom v. New York State Tax Commission

The petitioner, a real estate appraiser, challenged an unincorporated business tax assessment imposed by the State Tax Commission for the years 1967-1973. The court referenced a prior ruling (Matter of Rosenbloom v State Tax Comm.) which established that the petitioner's activities did not constitute a profession, thus not exempting him from the tax. Finding no new evidence to warrant a change in position, the court upheld the commission's determination regarding the professional exemption. Furthermore, the petitioner's attempt to deduct the fair value of his wife's uncompensated services was denied, as the expense was neither paid nor incurred during the taxable year, failing to meet the criteria for ordinary and necessary business deductions. Consequently, the determination was confirmed, and the petition was dismissed.

real estate appraiserunincorporated business taxtax assessmentprofessional exemptionbusiness expenseCPLR Article 78State Tax CommissionAlbany Countyprior precedentdeduction denial
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Craftmatic Comfort Manufacturing Corp. v. New York State Tax Commission

Petitioner, a Pennsylvania corporation selling adjustable beds, challenged a sales and use tax assessment for the period of March 1978 to February 1981. The corporation argued that sales of its beds, when prescribed by a physician, should be exempt as medical equipment under Tax Law § 1115 (a) (3). The respondent's determination disallowed this exemption, claiming the beds were not primarily used for medical purposes. The court, however, found the respondent's decision lacked substantial evidence, citing approvals from the Workers’ Compensation Board, Medicare, and the FDA, all of which classified the beds as medical devices or hospital beds. Consequently, the court annulled the portion of the determination denying the exemption for prescription sales and remitted the case for further proceedings.

Sales TaxUse TaxMedical Equipment ExemptionHospital BedsPhysician's PrescriptionSubstantial EvidenceTax LawCPLR Article 78Administrative ReviewTax Assessment
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wortman v. State Tax Commission

The petitioner, a salesman for Madison Sportswear and Wardrobe Makers, was assessed unincorporated business taxes for the years 1971-1974 by the State Tax Commission. He worked on a straight commission, maintained a home office, and received no employee benefits. Despite some evidence suggesting an employer-employee relationship, the Commission determined his activities constituted an unincorporated business, making his earnings subject to the tax. The court, in a CPLR article 78 proceeding, confirmed the Commission's determination, dismissing the petition.

Unincorporated Business TaxSalesmanCommission-basedEmployer-Employee RelationshipTax LawState Tax CommissionCPLR Article 78Tax LiabilityBusiness Expenses
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pochter v. State Tax Commission

The case concerns Leonard Pochter, an outside commission salesman, challenging a State Tax Commission determination classifying him as an independent contractor, thus subjecting him to unincorporated business tax for 1966-1972. Pochter contended he was an employee of two wholesale apparel firms, which would exempt him from the tax. Despite some company restrictions and requirements, the Commission found a lack of substantial control over his sales methods. The court affirmed the Commission's decision, citing insufficient evidence of employer supervision to establish an employee relationship, thereby dismissing Pochter's petition.

unincorporated business taxindependent contractor statusemployee statuscommission salesmantax assessmentCPLR Article 78State Tax Commissionapparel industryemployer control testtax law interpretation
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Scarbrough v. Murrow Transfer Co.

This case consolidates two wrongful death lawsuits filed by Mrs. Alberta Scarbrough and Claud Nolan against Murrow Transfer Company and Billy Ray Burge, stemming from a fatal motor vehicle accident on September 17, 1966. The accident, which resulted in the deaths of Randolph Scarbrough and Jimmy Ray Nolan, occurred when Burge, driving a tractor-trailer for Murrow Transfer, negligently crossed into the opposing lane, causing a collision with a United States Job Corps bus. The court found Burge and Murrow Transfer liable for negligence. Additionally, a third-party action for indemnity or contribution by the defendants against the United States of America was dismissed, with the court ruling that the Federal Employees Compensation Act provided the exclusive remedy for claims against the U.S. related to the Job Corps members' deaths. The plaintiffs were each awarded $28,000 in damages.

Motor Vehicle AccidentWrongful DeathNegligenceRespondeat SuperiorThird-Party ActionIndemnityContributionFederal Employees Compensation ActJob CorpsDamages
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 4,786 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