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. 2022 NY Slip Op 05053 [208 AD3d 818]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2022

Thorpe v. One Page Park, LLC

Lorenzo Thorpe, an employee at a construction site owned by One Page Park, LLC, sustained injuries after falling into a 14-16 foot deep pit. He commenced a personal injury action against One Page Park, LLC and A-W Coon & Sons, Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to the defendants and denied the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on liability. Upon reargument, the Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the order, denying the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action against One Page Park, LLC, citing elevation-related risk and triable issues of fact. The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1).

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentLabor Law Section 240(1)Elevation-Related HazardSummary Judgment MotionReargumentAppellate ReviewProximate CauseTriable Issue of FactProperty Owner Liability
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Greenman v. Page

Plaintiff George H. Greenman sustained injuries after falling from a roof while performing construction work on defendants' property. Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1), which was denied, and defendants cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint by the Supreme Court, Genesee County. The appellate court modified this order by denying defendants' cross-motion in part, reinstating the Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) causes of action, and granting plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). The court concluded that the homeowner exemption of Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6) did not apply to defendant John Page, a developer who rehabilitates homes for resale, despite his residence in one of the apartments of the two-family dwelling where the incident occurred. The court clarified that the exemption only extends as far as its language fairly warrants, resolving doubts in favor of the general provision. A dissenting opinion argued that the homeowner exemption should apply due to the mixed residential and commercial use of the dwelling, adhering to the principle that owners contracting work directly related to residential use, even with a commercial purpose, are shielded.

Labor LawHomeowner ExemptionConstruction AccidentRoof FallSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewDeveloper LiabilityStatutory InterpretationWorkplace SafetyResidential Property
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Page v. Liberty Central School District

Claimant Angela Page received workers' compensation benefits starting in 2004 for hypersensitivity to fungi, later including multiple chemical sensitivity. In 2012, the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) reversed a finding of permanent total disability, concluding no continuing causally-related disability based on an impartial specialist's opinion. After subsequent attempts by claimant to address her disability status were rejected by the WCB, claimant appealed. This appeal concerns a 2014 evaluation by physician Jeffrey Newton, who diagnosed claimant with consequential adjustment disorder related to her work-place originating condition. The WCLJ found prima facie evidence for consequential depression, but the Board reversed, citing its 2012 decision. This Court reversed the Board's decision, finding that the 2012 decision regarding no current causally-related disability does not preclude a claim for consequential psychological injury related to prior established conditions. The matter was remitted to the WCB for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation AppealCausally-Related DisabilityMultiple Chemical SensitivityHypersensitivity ReactionConsequential Psychological InjuryAdjustment DisorderAbuse of DiscretionRemandIndependent Medical Examination (IME)Workers' Compensation Board Reversal
References
6
Case No. 529776
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 12, 2020

Matter of Page v. Liberty Cent. Sch. Dist.

Angela Page, who received workers' compensation for occupational mold exposure and multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), sought benefits for a consequential psychological injury. Following a 2012 Board decision that she had no further causally-related physical disability, a WCLJ and the Board later precluded her psychiatrist's (Dr. Newton) reports and testimony regarding her adjustment disorder, citing noncompliance with IME regulations. They also found no compensable lost time. The Appellate Division reversed, ruling the employer's objection to Dr. Newton's evidence was untimely. It further found the Board's conclusion of no disability was not supported by substantial evidence, given that both claimant's and the employer's psychiatrists agreed on the psychological diagnosis, differing only on the degree of disability. The case was remitted for further proceedings.

Occupational ExposureToxic MoldHypersensitivity ReactionMultiple Chemical SensitivityConsequential Psychological InjuryAdjustment DisorderPsychiatric DisabilityIndependent Medical ExaminationEvidence PreclusionTimeliness of Objection
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 01, 1992

Seelig v. Sielaff

The Supreme Court, New York County, initially issued a judgment enjoining respondents from releasing the social security numbers of correction officers without their consent and ordered the implementation of privacy safeguards. This judgment was subsequently reversed on appeal, vacated, and the proceeding was converted to one for a declaratory judgment. The appellate court declared that the release of correction officers' social security numbers by the respondents, in response to a Public Officers Law § 87 request, constituted an unwarranted invasion of privacy under Public Officers Law § 89 (2), citing federal precedents. The injunctive relief previously granted was also deemed improper as the Personal Privacy Protection Law (Public Officers Law § 92 [1]) exempts local government units and the judiciary from its provisions.

Freedom of Information LawPrivacy InvasionSocial Security NumbersCorrection OfficersPublic Officers LawDeclaratory JudgmentAppellate ReviewGovernment RecordsConfidentialityCPLR Article 78
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Seeler v. H. G. Page & Sons, Inc.

The National Labor Relations Board, through Regional Director Thomas W. Seeler, sought a Section 10(j) injunction against H. G. Page & Sons, Inc. in Poughkeepsie, New York, alleging unfair labor practices. These practices included interfering with employees' Section 7 rights, discriminating in hiring to discourage union membership, and refusing to bargain with a newly elected union. The allegations stemmed from actions surrounding a January 1982 union representation election, where Page allegedly threatened to close and fired a union organizer. Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy denied the petition, citing the Board's four-month delay in seeking relief, the recall of most striking employees, and the lack of demonstrated irreparable harm or union majority support via authorization cards, distinguishing the case from prior precedents. The court found no compelling reason to bypass normal administrative procedures.

National Labor Relations ActSection 10(j)Unfair Labor PracticesUnion Representation ElectionInjunctive ReliefDelay in PetitionBargaining OrderEmployee RightsStrikeDiscriminatory Practices
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Page v. Monroe

This case involves two minor plaintiffs, Brittany and Melissa, who sued Dr. Patricia Monroe, a pediatrician, and Adirondack Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, P.C., alleging negligence and violation of statutory duties as mandated reporters for failing to report suspected child sexual abuse. The plaintiffs claimed Dr. Monroe breached her duty by not reporting their mother, Ms. Page, for allegedly allowing the abuse by their half-brother, Anthony, to continue. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint. The judge found no evidence that Dr. Monroe's failure to report was knowing and willful, nor that her actions proximately caused the plaintiffs' injuries, as the mother appeared to be taking responsible measures. The court also declined to expand the scope of a physician's duty to report against a parent taking protective steps. Cross-claims against third-party defendants were also dismissed as moot.

Child abuseMandated reporterMedical malpracticeSexual abuseSummary judgmentDuty to reportParental autonomySocial Services LawPediatricianProximate cause
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Number Workers Co. v. New Dimensions in Education, Inc.

This action for declaratory relief was initiated by The Number Workers Company, Inc. to declare it is not infringing copyrights, interfering with contracts, or engaging in unfair competition, and that the defendant is estopped from asserting such claims. The defendant subsequently filed a similar action in the Eastern District of New York, including Dr. Bernard Kauderer, the plaintiff's president. The plaintiff moved for an injunction against the Eastern District case, while the defendant cross-moved for a stay of this action, arguing proper venue in the Eastern District. The court denied the plaintiff's injunction motion and granted the defendant's motion to stay this action, reasoning that all issues could be resolved in the Eastern District case without inconvenience.

Declaratory ReliefCopyright InfringementUnfair CompetitionTortious InterferenceVenue DisputeInjunction DeniedStay GrantedPriority RuleBalance of ConvenienceEastern District of New York
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fitzgerald v. Jandreau

The plaintiff, Fitzgerald, president of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE), filed a suit against Jandreau, Cognetta, Whitbeck, Carey, Page, and Vicinanza, who represent the International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, CIO (IUE). This action arose from the disaffiliation of UE Local 301. The plaintiff sought to prevent the disaffiliation and to adjudicate the rights to Local 301's property, funds, and records, asserting these belong to members remaining with the UE. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that Local 301 was an indispensable party. The court, presided over by District Judge Goddard, concurred, stating that Local 301's interests in disaffiliation and property disposition were inextricably involved, and a just decree could not be entered without its presence. Consequently, the complaint was dismissed, with leave for the plaintiff to amend and join Local 301 as a party, if feasible, without addressing other pending motions.

Union DisaffiliationIndispensable PartyMotion to DismissFederal JurisdictionDiversity of CitizenshipProperty RightsLocal UnionInternational UnionLabor DisputeProcedural Law
References
15
Case No. ADJ2645988
Regular
Nov 07, 2011

BRIAN PAGE vs. DREAM TEX CORPORATION, CAL. COMP. in liquidation by CIGA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Brian Page's petition for reconsideration of the original decision. The Board adopted the judge's report, which found that Dr. Delamarter's reports were limited to a second opinion on surgery, not all issues, rendering his temporary disability opinions unsubstantial. The judge also upheld the defendant's entitlement to a $67,639 third-party credit from the applicant's civil settlement, finding no employer negligence proximately caused the injury. The Board found no basis for the applicant's claims of excess power or that the evidence did not justify the findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBrian PageDream Tex CorporationCal CompCIGAADJ2645988Petition for ReconsiderationRemovalWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeOpinion on Decision
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 424 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