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. 2020 NY Slip Op 00660
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2020

Matter of Jones v. General Traffic Equip. Corp.

Claimant Renford Jones, who sustained a work-related back injury resulting in a permanent partial disability, sought a hearing to modify his reduced earnings awards. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) modified the awards. The employer, General Traffic Equipment Corp., and the State Insurance Fund (SIF) appealed the WCLJ's decision to the Workers' Compensation Board, but their application for Board review was denied due to alleged incompleteness, specifically the omission of the hearing date for their objection. SIF's subsequent application for reconsideration was also denied. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Board's decision, finding that SIF's response, which provided the exact time of the objection in the digital audio recording of the sole hearing, adequately met the regulatory requirements. The court remitted the matter to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with its decision, dismissing the appeal from the denial of reconsideration as academic.

Workers' CompensationAdministrative ProcedureBoard ReviewRegulatory InterpretationAppellate ReviewProcedural Due ProcessWorkers' Compensation Law JudgeDigital Audio RecordingPleadings and MotionsDisability Benefits
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 1979

Fiat Motors of North America, Inc. v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation

Plaintiff Fiat Motors of North America, Inc. sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) from holding a hearing concerning alleged defects in Fiat vehicles and a repurchase campaign. Fiat contended it was deprived of adequate notice, an opportunity to present its views, and a hearing before an impartial tribunal. The court, presided over by District Judge Metzner, applied the exhaustion of remedies doctrine, emphasizing that judicial intervention is typically warranted only after a final agency determination. The court denied Fiat's motion, finding that Fiat received reasonable notice, its constitutional claims could be addressed at the hearing and were subject to de novo review, and there was insufficient evidence of agency bias. Consequently, the court ordered the hearing to proceed as scheduled on September 28, 1979.

Preliminary InjunctionAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewExhaustion of RemediesDue ProcessAdequate NoticeImpartial TribunalNational Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationVehicle SafetyProduct Recall
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Penn Traffic Co.

The Penn Traffic Company, a Chapter 11 debtor, sought to reject a Project Agreement with COR Route 5 Company, LLC, under Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. The agreement involved a land exchange, supermarket construction, and a lease-back. COR had completed all its obligations, including tendering a $3.5 million reimbursement and the signed lease, but Penn Traffic refused to accept. The court denied the motion, ruling that the Project Agreement was not an executory contract when the motion was filed, as COR had substantially performed its duties. The court emphasized that Penn Traffic's refusal to accept performance, invoking the Doctrine of Prevention of Performance, could not justify rejecting the contract as executory.

Bankruptcy LawExecutory ContractsSection 365(a)Contract RejectionSubstantial PerformancePrevention of Performance DoctrineDebtor-in-PossessionChapter 11Commercial Real EstateLand Swap
References
68
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 31, 1997

Di Blasi v. Traffax Traffic Network

Plaintiff, an on-air traffic announcer for Traffax Traffic Network, was discharged after reporting for jury duty despite his supervisor's directive to report to work. He subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging violations of Judiciary Law § 519 and wrongful/retaliatory discharge, as well as breach of contract. The Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint on the grounds that neither section of the Judiciary Law provided a private cause of action and that his employment was at-will, precluding a breach of contract claim. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, holding that allowing a private right of action would be inconsistent with the legislative scheme and acknowledging the Legislature's veto of a bill to amend Judiciary Law § 519 to include a civil remedy. The court also found no support for a breach of contract claim, reiterating that his at-will employment could be terminated for any reason.

jury dutywrongful dischargeretaliatory dischargeemployment at willprivate right of actionlegislative intentstatutory interpretationsummary judgmentbreach of contractemployee protection
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 25, 1989

Claim of Moses v. City of New York Department of Traffic

On December 17, 1981, a claimant sustained a compensable injury while employed by the City of New York Department of Traffic. The employer paid the claimant for lost time and later sought reimbursement under Workers' Compensation Law § 25 (4). The claimant, who was on an extended leave of absence and serving as a union president, requested direct payment for the lost time, arguing she was no longer an employee. Both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board denied direct payment. The Board's decision, which was subsequently affirmed on appeal, reasoned that the claimant could still utilize her credited leave time upon returning to work or be compensated for it upon resignation.

Workers' CompensationLeave of AbsenceReimbursementDirect PaymentEmployer-Employee RelationshipAccrued Leave TimeWage ReimbursementUnion PresidentCompensable InjuryAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. ADJ9800793
Regular
Oct 06, 2016

TRAVIS TIDWELL vs. PRO TRAFFIC SERVICES, COMPANION PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

In Tidwell v. Pro Traffic Services, the applicant, Travis Tidwell, petitioned for reconsideration of a July 12, 2016 decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues. This allows the Board to gain a complete understanding of the record for a just decision. All future filings related to the petition must now be submitted directly to the Commissioners' office in San Francisco, not district offices or e-filed.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardTravis TidwellPro Traffic ServicesCompanion Property and Casualty Insurance CompanyIntercare PasadenaSan Diego District OfficeStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned Decision
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 18, 1971

Claim of Bernsley v. Telemarine Communications Co.

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board which allowed a claim for death benefits. The decedent, a principal in the appellant corporation, died from cardiac failure during an emotional discussion about a vault tax assessed against a related corporation and paid by the appellant. The board found that the tax problems arose from decedent's employment with the appellant and that the emotional strain caused his death. The court affirmed the board’s finding that the problems over the vault tax arose out of and during the course of decedent’s employment and that the emotional strain and anxiety from dealing with the tax problems caused decedent’s death.

Death benefitsCardiac failureEmotional strainEmployment-related deathVault taxWorkmen's Compensation Board appealCausationSubstantial evidenceEmployer liability
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Board of Cooperative Educational Services v. Town of Colonie

The petitioner, an educational facility in Albany County, challenged the respondent's determination to condemn its exclusive access road for public highway use. The court reviewed the respondent's actions under EDPL 207, specifically focusing on compliance with SEQRA. The court found that the respondent failed to adequately address the petitioner's environmental concerns regarding increased traffic and student safety, thus not fulfilling the "hard look" requirement for a negative environmental declaration. Consequently, the respondent's determination was annulled. However, the court did affirm that the condemnation served a legitimate public purpose related to traffic safety and that the prior public use doctrine did not bar the taking.

Eminent DomainCondemnationEnvironmental ReviewSEQRAPublic PurposePrior Public Use DoctrineTraffic SafetyAccess RoadEasementJudicial Review
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Frangella Mushroom Farms, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

The petitioner, who operates a mushroom growing farm in the Town of Coeymans, sought a special use permit to construct an apartment building for its migrant laborers. The Zoning Board of Appeals denied the application, citing concerns related to aesthetic harmony, property values, safety, and traffic. However, the court found the Board's 17 specific findings to be arbitrary and capricious, lacking sufficient evidence in the record. The court determined that the proposed housing would not adversely affect the district and would replace existing substandard dwellings without increasing population or traffic. Consequently, the court annulled the Board's determination and mandated the issuance of the special use permit.

Zoning OrdinanceSpecial Use PermitArbitrary and CapriciousLand Use PlanningMigrant HousingAgricultural OperationsJudicial ReviewCPLR Article 78Town of CoeymansAlbany County
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stankowski v. Kim

Plaintiff's decedent, Janusz Stankowski, was killed after being struck by a truck backing into Post & Taback's loading dock at the New York City Terminal Market. Plaintiff alleged negligence against Post & Taback for maintaining a dangerous condition (debris) and failing to control traffic, claiming the debris caused Stankowski to slip and be struck again. The IAS court denied Post & Taback's motion for summary judgment, but the appellate court reversed, finding no admissible evidence of Stankowski slipping on debris and no duty for Post & Taback to maintain the area where the accident occurred or control traffic. The dissent argued that issues of fact remained regarding the debris contributing to the accident and Post & Taback's duty to clear the area close to its dock.

Summary JudgmentNegligencePremises LiabilityWrongful DeathAppellate ReviewEvidentiary RulesHearsay EvidenceTraffic ControlLoading Dock AccidentDuty of Care
References
16
Showing 1-10 of 254 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