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. ADJ6905551
Regular
May 24, 2010

Donald Laytham vs. SUTTER CENTER FOR PSYCHIATRY

This case concerns whether an industrial injury claim was barred as post-termination under Labor Code § 3600(a)(10). The applicant faxed a claim form on April 10, 2009, before receiving his termination notice on April 14, 2009, which was dated April 10, 2009, and mailed April 13, 2009. The Board affirmed the finding that the employer had sufficient notice of the injury prior to termination via the faxed claim form. Therefore, the claim was not barred as post-termination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings of FactIndustrial InjuryFacilities and Project CoordinatorClaim FormPost Termination ClaimLabor Code Section 3600(a)(10)Labor Code Section 5401(c)Labor Code Section 5402(a)
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mair-Headley v. County of Westchester

The petitioner, a correction officer, was terminated from her employment by the Westchester County Department of Corrections after being absent for over one year due to a nonoccupational injury, pursuant to Civil Service Law § 73. She challenged this determination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, alleging denial of due process and violation of the Human Rights Law. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the due process claim and transferred the remaining issues to this Court. This Court confirmed the determination, finding that the petitioner received adequate pre-termination notice and a post-termination hearing, satisfying due process. Additionally, the Court concluded that the termination did not violate the Human Rights Law, as employers are not obligated to create new light-duty or permanent light-duty positions for accommodation.

Civil Service LawCPLR Article 78Due ProcessHuman Rights LawEmployment TerminationCorrection OfficerDisability AccommodationWestchester CountyAppellate ReviewPublic Employment
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 11, 2002

Termine v. Continental Baking Co.

Salvatore Termine, a plaintiff, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Westchester County, which granted summary judgment to the defendant, Continental Baking Company (CBC), dismissing his personal injury complaint. Termine was injured in October 1998 while employed by Interstate Brands Corporation (IBC). CBC, the record owner of the property, had merged with its parent IBC in 1995, and its authority to do business in New York terminated shortly thereafter. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, ruling that Termine's action was barred by Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 because his employer, IBC, was the actual owner of the property at the time of the accident, not CBC. The court also rejected Termine's argument regarding CBC's failure to file a deed, stating Real Property Law § 291 protects purchasers, not personal injury claimants.

Workers' Compensation ExclusivityMerger of CorporationsReal Property OwnershipSummary JudgmentPersonal Injury DamagesAppellate ReviewEmployer ImmunityDelaware Corporation LawNew York Business LawDeed Filing
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Billings v. County of St. Lawrence

The petitioner, an unnamed Deputy Sheriff and correction officer for the St. Lawrence County Sheriff’s Department, was terminated after a disciplinary hearing. He was found guilty of unprofessional conduct for inappropriately delivering tobacco to an inmate and for lying during the subsequent investigation, though not for causing an inmate disturbance. Despite a Hearing Officer's recommendation for a two-month suspension, the Undersheriff of St. Lawrence County opted for termination, effective April 22, 1987. The court, in this CPLR article 78 proceeding, confirmed the determination, finding the evidence sufficient and the termination penalty not excessive given the serious nature of the misconduct in a prison setting and the petitioner's relatively short, unblemished service record.

MisconductTerminationDeputy SheriffCorrection OfficerInmate ConductDisciplinary ActionSubstantial EvidencePenalty ReviewUnprofessional ConductLack of Candor
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 27, 1994

In re the Guardianship & Custody of Angela Marie N.

This case concerns an appeal from an order of disposition in Family Court, New York County, which terminated a respondent's parental rights. The termination was based on a finding of mental illness, supported by extensive unrefuted evidence including the respondent's chronic degenerating mental condition, frequent hospitalizations, and failure to adhere to any treatment plan. A court-appointed psychiatrist concluded there was no possibility of improvement in the foreseeable future, confirming the respondent's inability to provide adequate care for her children. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the order, finding clear and convincing evidence for the termination and that the disposition, committing guardianship to the petitioner, was in the children's best interests. Furthermore, the court found no ineffective assistance of counsel, stating that strategic decisions should not be reevaluated with hindsight.

Parental Rights TerminationMental IllnessChild WelfareGuardianshipIneffective Assistance of CounselAppellate ReviewFamily LawBest Interests of the ChildSocial Services Law
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Weir v. State of New York Thruway Authority

Petitioner, a probationary laborer for the New York State Thruway Authority and New York State Canal Corporation, was terminated from his position after co-workers reported him for marihuana use during working hours. Despite a negative urine test and prior satisfactory performance reviews, the Albany Division Director recommended termination based on the credibility of the co-workers' statements and deteriorating relations. Petitioner challenged his termination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which was dismissed by the Supreme Court. The appellate court affirmed this dismissal, ruling that as a probationary employee, petitioner could be dismissed without a hearing or stated reasons, and he failed to demonstrate bad faith, arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise illegal reasons for his termination.

Probationary EmploymentTerminationDrug UseMarihuanaCPLR Article 78Judicial ReviewPublic EmploymentWorkplace ConductBad FaithArbitrary and Capricious
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re David Michael J.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Onondaga County Family Court, presided over by Judge Hedges, which terminated parental rights. The Appellate Court previously remitted the matter to Family Court for further proceedings, including a dispositional hearing. On remittal, the Family Court's determination was found to be supported by legally sufficient evidence, despite the admission of hearsay testimony, which was deemed proper under Family Ct Act § 624. The court properly relied on testimony from prior hearings and the dispositional hearing to conclude that there had been no substantial change or progress from the respondent that would prevent the termination of parental rights. Consequently, the order to terminate parental rights was unanimously affirmed.

Parental RightsTermination of Parental RightsFamily CourtAppealHearsay EvidenceDispositional HearingSuspended JudgmentComplianceFoster Care
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Leon RR

This dissenting opinion addresses a case concerning the permanent termination of parental rights for an infant, Leon, Jr., who had been in the physical custody of foster parents since 19 months of age. The dissent argues that the St. Lawrence County Department of Social Services consistently undermined the natural parental relationship, encouraging the foster parents and failing to make diligent efforts to assist the natural parents in maintaining their connection with the child. It criticizes the agency for not carrying out a plan for reintegration and for encouraging the infant's attachment to the foster parents while limiting natural parental visitation. The opinion asserts that the record is inadequate to support the termination of parental rights, highlighting that the natural parents had previously had their other children returned to them and had cooperated with caseworkers. The dissent concludes that the administrative agency's conduct amounted to an abuse of the temporary placement system and votes to reverse the order, seeking dismissal of the petition for permanent termination of parental rights and remittal for consideration of continued custody.

Parental Rights TerminationChild Custody DisputeFoster Care SystemChild WelfareFamily LawBest Interests of the ChildJudicial DissentDepartment of Social ServicesFamily Court ActParent-Child Relationship
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 1973

Reeves v. Golar

A probationary patrolman's employment with the New York City Housing Authority was terminated following suspicions of narcotic use, despite his claims of medication-related quinine traces and denial of unlawful drug use. His requests for medical test reports and a thorough medical examination were denied, leading to an informal hearing and subsequent termination. The court questioned the arbitrary and capricious nature of the dismissal, highlighting that the termination was based on unproven drug use rather than work performance. Citing due process concerns under the Fourteenth Amendment regarding the petitioner's liberty interest and reputation, the court found he deserved a proper hearing to refute the charges. Consequently, the Supreme Court's judgment to reinstate the petitioner was partially reversed, and the case was remanded to the Housing Authority for a further hearing and medical investigation.

Due processArticle 78probationary employmentterminationnarcotic suspicionurine testarbitrary and capriciousliberty interestFourteenth Amendmenthearing rights
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Aniya L.

This appeal concerns two Family Court orders that adjudicated respondent's children as permanently neglected and terminated her parental rights. The respondent, the mother of two children, challenged the Family Court's findings and decisions on several grounds. The appellate court found no error in the Family Court's procedural rulings concerning the attorney for the children. It also concluded that the petitioner diligently worked to strengthen the family bond, providing various services tailored to the respondent's mental health issues, parenting deficiencies, and unstable housing. Ultimately, the court upheld the termination of parental rights, determining that the respondent failed to adequately plan for her children's future and that termination was in the children's best interests, given their stable preadoptive foster home.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectDiligent EffortsBest Interests of ChildrenFamily Court ProcedureAttorney for Child RoleMental Health IssuesParenting SkillsDomestic Violence ConcernsUnstable Housing
References
19
Showing 1-10 of 2,711 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