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

May 07, 2003

Rypkema v. Time Manufacturing Co.

Rose Rypkema and Ted Rypkema sued Time Manufacturing Company for product liability after Rose Rypkema suffered injuries using a "Versalift" boom lift, alleging design defect and breach of warranty. Time moved for summary judgment, seeking to exclude the Rypkemas' expert, Nicholas Bellizzi, whose testimony lacked scientific methodology and testing for proposed alternative designs. District Judge Sweet, applying Daubert and Kumho Tire standards, excluded Bellizzi's testimony. Consequently, with no expert evidence to support the product liability claim, the court granted Time's motion to dismiss the complaint and Savvy Systems, Ltd.'s cross-motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, concluding there was insufficient evidence for product liability.

Product LiabilityExpert TestimonyDaubert StandardKumho Tire StandardSummary JudgmentDesign DefectFailure to WarnEngineering MethodologyAerial LiftLatch Failure

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Saudi v. S/T MARINE ATLANTIC

Plaintiff Captain Sheriff Saudi initiated a personal injury action against Koch Shipping, Inc. (KSI) and Koch Supply & Trading Company, Limited (KS&T) following a fall from a lifting basket on May 17, 1999, which he attributed to a defective crane on the tanker Marine Atlantic. Saudi's claims included negligence, unseaworthiness under maritime law, and negligence under the Jones Act. Koch, as time charterers, moved for summary judgment, asserting they had no control over the vessel or its equipment, thus no liability for unseaworthiness or crew negligence. The Court, applying Fifth Circuit maritime law, reiterated that time charterers are generally not liable unless the charter parties intended otherwise or the negligence fell within their traditional spheres of control (timing, route, cargo). Saudi attempted to establish liability through "Good Samaritan" and "chattel known to be dangerous" doctrines based on Koch's vessel vetting process, but the Court found no evidence of increased risk, undertaking of another's duty, or detrimental reliance. Concluding that Koch had no responsibility for the crane's condition under the time charter, the Court granted summary judgment for KSI and KS&T.

Maritime LawPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentTime Charterer LiabilityVessel UnseaworthinessJones Act NegligenceCrane AccidentAdmiralty JurisdictionDuty of CareGood Samaritan Doctrine

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Charter Roofing Co. v. Tri-State Insurance Co.

Charter Roofing appealed a trial court's summary judgment in favor of Tri-State Insurance Co. and Securance Corporation Agency. Charter alleged breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, violations of the DTPA and Insurance Code, and challenged the statute of limitations. The dispute arose after Tri-State denied a liability claim by Charter, which had voluntarily paid a third party, Weingarten Realty, for property damage without a judgment or settlement agreement. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that Texas law does not recognize a breach of good faith action for this type of third-party liability policy, Tri-State had a reasonable basis for denying the claim, and Charter violated policy provisions by making a voluntary payment. Furthermore, the court found Securance, as a procuring agent, was not liable and assessed damages against Charter for a frivolous appeal against Securance.

Insurance LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewBreach of ContractDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingDeceptive Trade Practices ActInsurance CodeThird-Party LiabilityPolicy ExclusionsVoluntary Payment

References

Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08595 [156 AD3d 1043]

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 07, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Board v. Any-Time Home Care Inc.

The New York State Workers' Compensation Board, acting as administrator for a dissolved self-insured trust, initiated an action to recover a $133 million cumulative deficit from former trust members. Various defendants sought to dismiss the complaint, asserting claims were time-barred by a three-year statute of limitations for statutory liabilities, failed to adequately state claims against individual partners, and were barred by the doctrine of laches. The Supreme Court denied these motions. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, ruling that the claims were contractual, subject to a six-year limitation period, and that laches did not apply against the state enforcing a public right. The court also found the complaint sufficiently specific regarding the liability of individual defendants.

Workers' Compensation LawSelf-Insurance TrustJoint and Several LiabilityStatute of LimitationsContractual LiabilityLaches DoctrineAppellate ReviewGroup Self-InsurerDeficit RecoveryPartnership Liability

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Fox News Network, L.L.C. v. Time Warner Inc.

This case arises from a dispute between Time Warner and Fox concerning Time Warner's decision not to carry Fox News on its New York City cable channels. Fox initially sued Time Warner, prompting Time Warner to file counterclaims alleging that Fox conspired with New York City officials to unlawfully coerce Time Warner into carrying Fox News. Time Warner's counterclaims assert violations of its First Amendment and Due Process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and tortious interference with contractual relations. Fox moved to dismiss these counterclaims, arguing that its actions were protected by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which generally shields lobbying activities. The court denied Fox's motion, concluding that Time Warner had adequately alleged a conspiracy and that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine might not apply if Fox's conduct was found to be illegal or corrupt, thus allowing the counterclaims to proceed.

First Amendment RightsDue ProcessSection 1983Noerr-Pennington DoctrineCable ActAntitrustLobbyingFreedom of SpeechConspiracyMotion to Dismiss

References

Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 04311

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 16, 2023

Maisuradze v. Nows The Time, Inc.

The plaintiff, Gia Maisuradze, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Kings County, concerning personal injuries sustained from a falling metal pipe at a Brooklyn construction site. The Supreme Court had granted summary judgment to defendant E&J All Seasons Construction Corp. and denied Maisuradze's cross-motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability against E&J and Nows The Time, Inc. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, finding E&J was not liable as a general contractor or agent and that Maisuradze failed to establish proximate cause for the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, as he could not identify the pipe's origin or purpose.

Construction AccidentFalling ObjectSummary Judgment MotionAppellate DivisionLabor Law ViolationsPersonal InjuryProximate CauseWork Site ControlGeneral Contractor LiabilityAgent Liability

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Ameristar Jet Charter, Inc. v. Cobbs

Charles Jeff Cobbs and his company, Falcon Air Charter, L.L.C., sued their former employer, Ameristar Jet Charter, Inc., seeking declaratory judgment and damages related to a confidentiality agreement and alleged competition. Ameristar counterclaimed for breach of fiduciary duty and other torts. A jury sided with Cobbs on malicious prosecution and found against Ameristar's counterclaims. The trial court issued a judgment notwithstanding the verdict on Cobbs's wrongful injunction and tortious interference claims. On appeal, the court reversed the malicious prosecution claim, finding insufficient evidence of damages, but affirmed the trial court's judgment in all other respects, including the denial of attorney's fees to Ameristar.

malicious prosecutionbreach of fiduciary dutytemporary injunctiontrade secretsdeclaratory judgmentattorney's feestortious interferencewrongful injunctionlost profitsappellate review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 30, 2013

Claim of Scott v. Rochester City School District

The claimant injured his back in 2004 while working as a custodian's assistant and the claim was established in 2009. In 2008, the claimant sustained an unrelated left knee injury and stopped working. In 2012, the claimant sought treatment for his back injury, claiming three months of lost time. The workers' compensation carrier sought to transfer liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the transfer of liability and the award of benefits for a temporary, marked partial disability, prompting an appeal by the Special Fund. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that the award for lost time prior to the hearing was consistent with the Board's precedent regarding the timing of raising the issue of labor market attachment.

Workers' Compensation BoardSpecial FundReopened CasesLiability TransferLabor Market AttachmentPartial DisabilityLost WagesBack InjuryKnee InjuryAppellate Division

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Charter Builders v. Durham

Charter Builders, a general contractor, appealed a judgment denying its claims for indemnity or contribution from Commercial Drywall, a third-party defendant. Durham, an employee, had originally sued Charter Builders for personal injuries sustained at a construction site. The jury found negligence and gross negligence against Charter Builders, apportioning 55% of the negligence. The appellate court affirmed the denial of contribution, citing Charter Builders' failure to support its claim, its proportionate payment of damages, the basis of exemplary damages on gross negligence, and Commercial Drywall's immunity as a subscribing employer under the Workers' Compensation Act. The court also denied indemnification, ruling that the contractual provisions did not unequivocally indemnify Charter Builders against its own negligence, as required by Texas law, and no exceptions applied to this rule.

Workers' CompensationContributionIndemnity AgreementJoint TortfeasorsEmployer ImmunityGross NegligenceAppellate ProcedureContract InterpretationPremises LiabilityEmployee Definition

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

New York Charter School Ass'n v. Smith

This case involves appeals from two Supreme Court judgments concerning the applicability of Labor Law article 8's prevailing wage provisions to construction, renovation, repair, and maintenance projects undertaken by charter schools. Initially, the Department of Labor (DOL) had issued an opinion that charter school contracts were not subject to these provisions but reversed its stance in 2007. Various charter schools and related entities challenged this new determination, but the Supreme Court dismissed their applications, ruling in favor of DOL. On appeal, the court applied the two-part Erie County test, including modifications from a 2007 statutory amendment, to determine if the projects were subject to prevailing wage laws. The appellate court concluded that charter agreements do not satisfy the requirements of a contract for public work involving laborers, workers, or mechanics, thus reversing the lower court's judgments and declaring charter schools exempt from Labor Law article 8's prevailing wage provisions.

Charter SchoolsPrevailing Wage LawLabor Law Article 8Public Work ProjectsDeclaratory JudgmentCPLR Article 78Educational CorporationsStatutory InterpretationLegislative IntentErie County Test

References

Showing 1-10 of 10,660 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

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

May 07, 2003

Rypkema v. Time Manufacturing Co.

Product LiabilityExpert TestimonyDaubert StandardKumho Tire StandardSummary JudgmentDesign DefectFailure to WarnEngineering MethodologyAerial LiftLatch Failure

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Saudi v. S/T MARINE ATLANTIC

Maritime LawPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentTime Charterer LiabilityVessel UnseaworthinessJones Act NegligenceCrane AccidentAdmiralty JurisdictionDuty of CareGood Samaritan Doctrine

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Charter Roofing Co. v. Tri-State Insurance Co.

Insurance LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewBreach of ContractDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingDeceptive Trade Practices ActInsurance CodeThird-Party LiabilityPolicy ExclusionsVoluntary Payment

References

Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08595 [156 AD3d 1043]

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 07, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Board v. Any-Time Home Care Inc.

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Fox News Network, L.L.C. v. Time Warner Inc.

First Amendment RightsDue ProcessSection 1983Noerr-Pennington DoctrineCable ActAntitrustLobbyingFreedom of SpeechConspiracyMotion to Dismiss

References

Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 04311

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 16, 2023

Maisuradze v. Nows The Time, Inc.

Construction AccidentFalling ObjectSummary Judgment MotionAppellate DivisionLabor Law ViolationsPersonal InjuryProximate CauseWork Site ControlGeneral Contractor LiabilityAgent Liability

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Ameristar Jet Charter, Inc. v. Cobbs

malicious prosecutionbreach of fiduciary dutytemporary injunctiontrade secretsdeclaratory judgmentattorney's feestortious interferencewrongful injunctionlost profitsappellate review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 30, 2013

Claim of Scott v. Rochester City School District

Workers' Compensation BoardSpecial FundReopened CasesLiability TransferLabor Market AttachmentPartial DisabilityLost WagesBack InjuryKnee InjuryAppellate Division

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Charter Builders v. Durham

Workers' CompensationContributionIndemnity AgreementJoint TortfeasorsEmployer ImmunityGross NegligenceAppellate ProcedureContract InterpretationPremises LiabilityEmployee Definition

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

New York Charter School Ass'n v. Smith

Charter SchoolsPrevailing Wage LawLabor Law Article 8Public Work ProjectsDeclaratory JudgmentCPLR Article 78Educational CorporationsStatutory InterpretationLegislative IntentErie County Test

References

Showing 1-10 of 10,660 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.