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. 2018 NY Slip Op 04413 [162 AD3d 1286]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 14, 2018

Matter of Tobin v. Finger Lakes DDSO

Kristi M. Tobin, a support aide, sustained injuries in April 2012 after being assaulted by a client, leading to a workers' compensation claim established for various injuries including reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD)/complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) of her right face. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded schedule loss of use for vision loss and facial disfigurement. The Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, classifying claimant's RSD/CRPS and ptosis as a nonschedule permanent partial disability under Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (3) (w), rescinding the prior awards, and remitting the case for further record development regarding loss of wage-earning capacity. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's determination, finding substantial medical evidence supported the nonschedulable permanent partial disability classification due to the claimant's ongoing chronic pain and worsening ptosis, consistent with not receiving both schedule loss of use and nonschedule permanent partial disability awards for the same work-related accident.

Workers' Compensation LawPermanent Partial DisabilitySchedule Loss of UseReflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD)Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)Facial DisfigurementWage-Earning CapacityAppellate ReviewMedical EvidenceSubstantial Evidence
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ganthier v. North Shore-Long Island Jewish Healthy System

Esther Ganthier sued North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, Susan Tobin, GreyStone Staffing, Inc., and Karen Westerlind alleging race and national origin discrimination, First Amendment retaliation, and conspiracy. GreyStone and Westerlind moved to dismiss, while Ganthier cross-moved for leave to amend her complaint. The Court granted the motion to dismiss all claims against GreyStone and Westerlind, finding individuals are not liable under Title VII and GreyStone was not named in the EEOC charge. It also dismissed Section 1981, First Amendment retaliation, and conspiracy claims due to pleading deficiencies. Consequently, the Court declined supplemental jurisdiction over state and city human rights laws against the dismissed defendants and denied Ganthier's cross-motion to amend as futile, instructing to amend the caption to reflect only North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System and Susan Tobin as defendants.

DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationRace DiscriminationFirst Amendment RetaliationConspiracyMotion to DismissLeave to AmendTitle VII ClaimsSection 1981 ClaimsFederal Civil Procedure Rules
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tobin v. Barry

Plaintiffs, members of IBEW Local 501, initiated a lawsuit against the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), its Vice President J.J. Barry, Local 1249, several employer-contractors (Yonkers Contracting Co., Inc., L.K. Com-stock & Co., and Yonkers-Comstock Joint Venture), and their bargaining representative, the Northeastern Line Contractors Chapter (NLCC). The core of the dispute revolved around the IBEW's transfer of work assignment jurisdiction over a Metro North project from Local 501 to Local 1249 within Westchester County. Plaintiffs alleged breaches of the IBEW constitution, violations of Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) and Section 101(a)(5) of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA), and breaches of duty of fair representation and contracts by the employer-contractors. The court granted NLCC's motion to dismiss due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim against it, but denied other defendants' motions for summary judgment, ruling that the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust intraunion remedies was excused due to union misdirection, and that their claims were timely filed under the applicable statutes of limitations.

Labor DisputeUnion JurisdictionBreach of Union ConstitutionLMRA Section 301LMRDA Section 101(a)(5)Exhaustion of Internal Union RemediesStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentMotion to DismissCollective Bargaining Agreement
References
16
Case No. ADJ7026308
Regular
Apr 01, 2011

CARLOS HERRERA vs. OBSTRO HERMITAGE, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board disqualified both the applicant's former counsel, Law Office of Lionel E. Giron, and the defendant's counsel, Tobin-Lucks, due to a conflict of interest. Applicant's attorney, Heather Brandt, failed to obtain informed written consent from her client before seeking and accepting employment with Tobin-Lucks, who represented the opposing party. Sanctions of $250 were imposed on William K. Calderon and the Law Office of Lionel E. Giron for this misconduct. The prior WCJ decision was rescinded, and the case was returned for a new trial with new counsel.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDecision After Reconsiderationdisqualificationsanctionslabor code section 5813WCAB Rule 10561industrial injurylow backheadneck
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tobin v. Steisel

The dissenting opinion concerns an appeal by a stationary fireman regarding the denial of his accidental disability retirement application by the New York City Employees’ Retirement System, despite being granted ordinary disability. The petitioner claimed injuries, including hearing loss and post-concussion syndrome, following an explosion, with various doctors supporting a causal link. However, the medical board, relying on a psychiatrist's report, concluded the accident was merely a precipitating, not causal, event. The dissenting judge argues this distinction is semantic and unjust, particularly given the absence of any pre-existing medical conditions. Therefore, the judge advocates for reversing the Special Term's judgment and remanding the case for further clarification of the determination.

Accidental Disability RetirementOrdinary Disability RetirementNew York City Employees’ Retirement SystemCausation MedicalPost-Concussion SyndromeAcoustic TraumaTraumatic NeurosisArticle 78 ProceedingAppellate ReviewMedical Board Opinion
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 13, 1978

Tobin v. City of Yonkers

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision, filed April 13, 1978, which affirmed an award of death benefits to the claimant. The Board found, based on the record and earlier testimony of Dr. Alesio, that the claimant sustained an accident arising out of and in the course of employment, and that the subsequent death was causally related to a myocardial infarction, finding the effect of climbing stairs was more than the wear and tear of life. The appellate court found substantial evidence to support the Board's determination and affirmed the decision.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsMyocardial InfarctionCausationEmployment AccidentAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceWear and Tear DoctrineMedical TestimonyBoard Decision
References
0
Case No. ADJ2514169 (VNO 0556845)
Regular
Jul 22, 2014

Hector Dingle vs. Tobin Lucks

This case involves applicant(s) appealing a decision before the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The Board has dismissed the applicant's Petition for Removal as moot. This means the underlying issue raised in the petition is no longer relevant or subject to appeal. The order was filed on July 22, 2014, and served on the listed parties.

Petition for RemovalDismissedMootWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ2514169ADJ255943VNO 0556845VNO 0556846Pomona District OfficeRonnie G. Caplane
References
0
Case No. ADJ8593193
Regular
Sep 17, 2015

MICHAEL TOBIN vs. CITY OF UKIAH, COUNTY OF MENDOCINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's report and recommendation. The defendant failed to rebut the Labor Code Section 3212.1 presumption for the applicant's cancer by providing evidence that no reasonable link existed between his military carcinogen exposure and the disease. Furthermore, the Board found that new arguments regarding the date of injury and collateral estoppel were improperly raised for the first time in the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 3212.1presumptionrebuttalcarcinogen exposurePersian Gulf WarVAMC Medical OpinionDepartment of Defense StudiesVA administrative findings
References
4
Case No. ADJ663546
Regular
Oct 01, 2009

Sudha Rajender vs. TOBIN LUCKS, MALMQUIST, FIELDS & CAMASTRA

The WCJ found insufficient evidence of significant stress to support a conclusion that work stress contributed to applicant's coronary heart disease. The Board affirmed the WCJ's determination and denied the petition for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSudha RajenderTobin LucksMalmquist Fields Camastracumulative trauma injurymyocardial infarctionQualified Medical EvaluatorDr. Gerald Bessespetition for reconsiderationindustrial causation
References
0
Case No. ADJ2930022 (AHM 0141132)
Regular
Jul 20, 2009

CON FLORES vs. TOBIN STEEL COMPANY, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed the finding that the defendant is not responsible for the applicant's self-procured medical treatment incurred outside the Medical Provider Network. However, the Board rescinded the administrative law judge's award of attorney's fees, finding it improperly determined without considering the services rendered by multiple attorneys. The case was remanded to allow the applicant's current and former attorneys to agree on a fee split, with jurisdiction reserved for further determination if they cannot reach an agreement.

Medical Provider Network (MPN)self-procured medical treatmentattorney feesfee splitsubstitution of attorneyconsecutive counseldue processfindings and awardpermanent disabilitytemporary disability
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 15 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