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

Carter v. Bane

Petitioner Shirley Carter, the paternal grandmother of Javette Alexander, challenged a New York State Department of Social Services (NYS-DSS) decision disallowing foster care payments for Javette from May 2, 1986, onwards. While payments were approved for an earlier period, NYS-DSS argued Carter's foster parent status lapsed upon the expiration of a Family Court placement order. The court found that the New York City Department of Social Services (NYC-DSS) failed in its statutory duty to extend or review Javette's placement, effectively abandoning the child and unjustly changing Carter's status from a paid caregiver to a volunteer. The court granted Carter's application, ordering retroactive foster care payments from May 2, 1986, and remanded the case for a review of Javette's legal status.

Foster Care PaymentsChild CustodyArticle 78 ProceedingGrandparent RightsNeglect PetitionPlacement OrderAbandoned ChildGovernment Agency ResponsibilityKinship Foster CareRetroactive Payments
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carter v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

Ava Carter, an EMT with FDNY, suffered spinal and hand injuries from a 1995 line-of-duty ambulance accident. Her employment was terminated in August 2008 due to medical separation. She applied for both line-of-duty and non-line-of-duty disability pensions under Retirement and Social Security Law §§ 607-b and 605, respectively. While her non-line-of-duty pension was approved in October 2009, respondents refused to consider her § 607-b application because her employment had been terminated prior to applying. Carter challenged this refusal, arguing timeliness and that § 605's filing requirements should apply to § 607-b. The court found the petition timely but denied it, concluding that § 607-b requires applicants to be employed at the time of filing, and § 605's extended filing period does not apply to § 607-b.

Disability pensionLine of duty injuryEmergency Medical TechnicianEmployment terminationStatute of limitationsAdministrative reviewStatutory interpretationNew York City Employees' Retirement SystemReflex Sympathetic DystrophyCarpal Tunnel Syndrome
References
29
Case No. 531567
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Yi Sun

Claimant Yi Sun appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision from August 14, 2020, which denied her request to reopen two workers' compensation claims and seek an increase in benefits. Sun, a former jeweler technician and hotel housekeeper, had established claims in 2002 and 2008 for occupational bronchitis and work-related injuries, respectively, both resulting in permanent partial disabilities. She sought reclassification and emergency assistance due to worsened conditions and exhaustion of indemnity benefits. The Board denied her request, finding insufficient evidence of a material change in condition and untimely filing for an extreme hardship redetermination. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding no abuse of discretion given the lack of medical documentation to support a change in her condition and her failure to meet the requirements for an extreme hardship redetermination under Workers' Compensation Law § 35 (3).

Reopening claimsPermanent partial disabilityWage-earning capacityIndemnity benefitsExtreme hardshipReclassificationWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate reviewMedical evidenceChange in condition
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Carter A.

This case concerns an appeal from a Family Court order that adjudicated Carter A. as an abandoned child and terminated the respondent-father's parental rights. The child was removed from parental custody in October 2011 and subsequently placed in foster care after a neglect finding against the father. The petitioner initiated abandonment proceedings in June 2012, alleging the father failed to visit or communicate with the child or the petitioner for the statutory six-month period. The Appellate Court affirmed the Family Court's decision, concluding that clear and convincing evidence supported the finding of abandonment, as the father's few contacts were sporadic and primarily petitioner-initiated. The court also rejected the father's arguments regarding a suspended judgment and alleged defects in the petition, affirming the termination of parental rights.

Parental Rights TerminationAbandonmentChild NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewFoster CareIncarcerated ParentCommunication FailureVisitation RightsClear and Convincing Evidence
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sheridan v. Carter

The plaintiffs, Fontaine Sheridan and Donald Sheridan, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County. The original order had granted the defendant Domestic Workers United's (DWU) motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action in a defamation case, and also granted defendant Cindy Carter's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against her. The appellate court reversed this order, denying both DWU's motion to dismiss and Carter's motion for summary judgment. The case stemmed from Carter's allegations of abuse and exploitation by the Sheridans, which were published in newspapers and circulated by DWU in flyers, leading the Sheridans to sue for defamation. The appellate court found sufficient allegations for a libel claim against DWU and that Carter failed to prove the truth of her defamatory statements.

DefamationLibelSummary JudgmentMotion to DismissCPLR 3211(a)(7)Appellate ReviewPublic ConcernDomestic WorkersAbuse AllegationsImmigration Status
References
18
Case No. ANA 0402832
Regular
Jul 02, 2008

JOANN RAEKER vs. TSUCHIYAMA KAINO SUN-CARTER, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed a prior award, except for the permanent disability rating. The Board found that due process required further proceedings at the trial level regarding the permanent disability rating because the defendant was not properly served with the formal rating instructions. The case is remanded to the WCJ for a new decision on permanent disability.

Tsusohiya Kaino Sun-CarterSt. Paul Travelers Insurance CompanyFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent Disability RatingPenaltyAttorney FeeReconsiderationWCJ
References
1
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00226
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2022

Matter of Yi Sun v. State Ins. Fund

Claimant Yi Sun appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision from August 14, 2020. The Board had denied her request to reopen two prior workers' compensation claims, citing insufficient evidence of a material change in her condition warranting reclassification and an untimely request for an extreme hardship redetermination. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding no abuse of discretion. The court noted the absence of medical reports to support her claim of worsened conditions. Additionally, her request for extreme hardship redetermination was outside the statutory timeframe and she did not meet the necessary threshold of a greater than 75% loss of wage-earning capacity.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityReclassificationExtreme HardshipIndemnity BenefitsWage-Earning CapacityAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewMaterial Change in ConditionOccupational Bronchitis
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carter v. Caring for the Homeless of Peekskill, Inc.

This Title VII action concerns a male employee, Mr. Larry Carter, who alleged sexual harassment and constructive discharge by Dr. Janet Foy, Chairman of the Board of Directors of his employer, Caring for the Homeless of Peekskill, Inc. The alleged harassment followed the termination of a consensual sexual relationship between Carter and Foy. After a jury found in favor of Carter, the defendants moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The court examined the alleged incidents of harassment, including off-premises confrontations and a request for resignation, and concluded that they did not constitute a hostile work environment or constructive discharge under Title VII standards. The court determined that the issues arose from a 'failed affair' rather than workplace harassment. Consequently, the defendants' motion was granted, and judgment was entered in their favor.

Sexual HarassmentConstructive DischargeTitle VIIJury Verdict OverturnedJudgment Notwithstanding VerdictHostile Work EnvironmentFailed Personal RelationshipEmployment LawFederal District CourtEmployee Rights
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Katulak v. Carter

John Katulak, the plaintiff, was involved in an automobile accident at an intersection in Wawayanda, New York, where a stop sign was missing. He subsequently initiated a personal injury action against Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (the appellant), Lloyd A. Carter, and Thomas Leichliter. The appellant, in turn, filed a third-party action against the County of Orange. The Supreme Court initially denied the appellant's motion for summary judgment but granted similar motions by Carter, Leichliter, and the County. On appeal, the higher court reversed the Supreme Court's decision, granting summary judgment to Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., thereby dismissing all claims and cross claims asserted against them. The appeals pertaining to the second and third orders were dismissed.

Personal InjuryAutomobile AccidentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewNegligenceRoadway ConditionMissing Traffic SignCausationThird Party ActionCounty Liability
References
4
Case No. ADJ1513511
Regular
Sep 21, 2015

RIZALINA DERRO vs. KAISER PERMANENTE, WEST ANAHEIM MEDICAL CENTER, TERRACE VIEW CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL, COVENANT CARE, SOUTH GATE CARE CENTER, BROADSPIRE, SUN HEALTH CARE, AIG CLAIM SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision that found Sun Health Care/Regency and CNA Claims Plus liable for the applicant's left wrist injury. The applicant sustained a cumulative trauma injury to her left wrist during the period of 11-1-1995 to 11-1-1996, while employed by both Covenant Care (insured by AIG) and Sun Health Care (insured by CNA). A previous Compromise and Release barred claims against Covenant Care and AIG, leaving Sun Health Care and CNA liable. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which relied on medical evidence and legal precedent to uphold the finding of industrial injury and liability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeCumulative TraumaLeft Wrist InjuryCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCompromise and ReleaseApportionmentDate of InjuryMedical Probability
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 143 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