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
Sep 17, 2013

Whitaker v. Case

This case involves cross appeals from a judgment in a divorce action concerning the equitable distribution of marital property, child custody, and child support. The Supreme Court initially granted divorce, distributed marital property, awarded the husband sole legal and physical custody, and suspended the wife's child support obligation. On appeal, the court affirmed some aspects, modified others, and reversed one part. Specifically, the court found certain bank accounts to contain marital funds, increased the wife's distributive share, recognized a credit for the wife's separate property used for a home construction, and adjusted the awards for other properties. The suspension of the wife's child support due to parental interference by the husband was upheld, as was the escrowing of payments, but the direct reimbursement for past child support payments was reversed. The court also upheld the denial of counsel fees to the wife but affirmed the award of costs.

DivorceEquitable DistributionMarital PropertyChild SupportChild CustodySeparate PropertyParental AlienationAppellate ReviewProperty DivisionAlimony
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Behan v. Behan

Justice Balletta concurs in part and dissents in part, advocating for a modification of the trial court's maintenance award to the wife. The trial court initially awarded the wife $150 per week for five years, while the majority proposed 10 years or until the husband's retirement. Justice Balletta argues for an eight-year maintenance period, citing the wife's age (46), high school education with some college, and five years of work experience as a school aide earning $11,000 annually. The husband, age 47, earned $55,000. The wife received approximately $250,000 in equitable distribution and a portion of the husband's pension. The opinion emphasizes the Equitable Distribution Law's goal of economic independence and self-sufficiency, suggesting an eight-year period is sufficient for the wife to gain further training and become financially independent, especially since her children are emancipated and she will have investment income.

maintenanceequitable distributiondivorcespousal supporteconomic independencemarital assetsduration of maintenancefinancial independenceself-supporting spouseappellate division
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mesholam v. Mesholam

The plaintiff husband appeals a Supreme Court judgment in a divorce case concerning equitable distribution of his pension, pendente lite arrears, mortgage payments, the wife's social worker license valuation, and counsel fees. The appellate court modified the judgment, ruling that the husband should be credited for principal mortgage payments made between April 2000 and August 2001. It also found the counsel fee award to the wife was an improvident exercise of discretion, directing its deletion. The matter was remitted for recalculation of the mortgage credit and reconsideration of the husband's pension valuation date, setting it to the commencement of a prior discontinued divorce action in September 1994.

DivorceEquitable DistributionPension ValuationPendente Lite ArrearsMortgage PaymentsMarital ResidenceCounsel FeesSpousal SupportAppellate ReviewDiscretion Abuse
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. Chapin

This appellate decision reviews a divorce judgment concerning equitable distribution of marital property, maintenance, and child support. The court addresses the husband's appeal regarding the distribution of the Claverack property's appreciated value, his separate premarital debt payments, pendente lite support, and counsel fees. The court modifies the division of the Claverack property's appreciation to 75% for the husband and 25% for the wife, and grants the husband credits for pendente lite support overpayments and marital residence payments during litigation. The court otherwise affirms the lower court's findings, including imputing income to the husband due to his history of asset concealment and upholding the durational maintenance and child support awards, as well as counsel and expert fees for the wife.

DivorceEquitable DistributionMarital PropertySeparate PropertySpousal SupportChild SupportImputed IncomeAsset ConcealmentAppellate ReviewPre-marital Debt
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 1989

Schmidt v. Schmidt

The case involves an appeal by a plaintiff wife from a judgment in a divorce action regarding her defendant husband's right to reside in a marital residence apartment. The Supreme Court, Queens County, initially allowed the husband to remain, and this decision was affirmed on appeal. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion, citing Domestic Relations Law § 234 and emphasizing the trial court's broad authority in matrimonial actions. Key factors included the speculative nature of the wife's expert testimony regarding potential harm to children and the husband's financial inability to secure alternative housing without significantly impacting child support payments. The court considered the financial circumstances of both parties and the children's needs in fashioning an equitable remedy, allowing the husband to contribute more significantly to support if he remained in the apartment.

DivorceAncillary ReliefMarital ResidenceChild SupportFinancial CircumstancesAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionExpert TestimonyQueens CountyFamily Law
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ciafone v. Kenyatta

The case concerns Salvatore Ciafone, a former police officer, who was shot by Ibn Kenyatta in 1974. After Kenyatta received a medical malpractice settlement in 2001, Ciafone and his wife sued him under New York's "Son of Sam Law" (Executive Law § 632-a) to recover damages. Kenyatta challenged the law's constitutionality, arguing it violated the Ex Post Facto Clause and the Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court denied his motion to dismiss, and the appellate court affirmed. The appellate court ruled that the Son of Sam Law is civil, non-punitive, and serves the legitimate public purpose of victim compensation without violating constitutional provisions.

Ex Post Facto LawContract ClauseSon of Sam LawCrime Victim CompensationStatutory ConstitutionalityCivil RestitutionAppellate DecisionDue ProcessCriminal InjuryLegislative Intent
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 04, 1983

Slatt v. Slatt

This case concerns a dispute between a divorced couple over a separation agreement from 1969. The plaintiff wife sought cost-of-living increases on a yearly bonus, in addition to monthly support payments. While cost-of-living increases were applied to monthly payments, they were not applied to the bonus for over a decade. The defendant husband conceded some miscalculations on monthly payments but argued the bonus was not subject to such increases, citing a six-year Statute of Limitations. The trial court initially ruled for the plaintiff on the bonus, but this dissenting opinion argues that the parties' consistent conduct over many years indicated the cost-of-living index did not apply to the bonus, thus advocating for a modification of the judgment.

separation agreementcost-of-living adjustmentspousal supportcontract interpretationstatute of limitationsmarital propertyappellate reviewdissenting opinionbonus paymentsNew York courts
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rocha v. State

Claimant Adeline Rocha, a laborer for Mount Vernon Construction Company, sustained severe injuries on August 25, 1970, after falling from a scaffold during a bridge widening project in Westchester County. The platform, constructed by the contractor, collapsed due to a broken plank. Rocha and his wife brought an action against the State, the owner, alleging a violation of Labor Law section 240. The State challenged its liability as an owner and whether the platform constituted a scaffold. The trial court sided with the claimants, a decision affirmed on appeal. The appellate court clarified that the 1969 amendment to Labor Law section 240 imposed a nondelegable duty on owners, aligning it with sections 241 and 241-a, thereby affirming the State's liability.

Labor Law 240Scaffold CollapseOwner LiabilityNondelegable DutyConstruction AccidentStatutory InterpretationAppellate DecisionPersonal InjuryBridge WideningWorker Safety
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

London v. London

This case concerns a lawsuit filed by a former wife against her former husband, alleging unlawful interception and recording of her telephone conversations with their eight-year-old daughter. The defendant used an automatic answering machine attached to his home phone, where the daughter resided, to record these calls during 1973-1974, a period of their legal separation before their divorce. The plaintiff sought damages under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2511 and 2520, which prohibit willful wire communication interception and provide a civil cause of action. The Court, citing Simpson v. Simpson, dismissed the complaint, ruling that Congress did not intend these statutes to apply to a family member's interception of calls within the family home, regardless of the recording method or the specific family relationship.

Telephone EavesdroppingWire Communication InterceptionFamily LawDomestic DisputesPrivacyFederal JurisdictionMotion to Dismiss18 U.S.C. 251118 U.S.C. 2520Marital Home
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brown v. Reinauer Transportation Companies, LLC

Plaintiff George Brown was injured in July 2003 after falling from a ladder on a barge owned by his employers. He, along with his wife derivatively, commenced an action under the Jones Act and general maritime law, alleging negligence and unseaworthiness due to unsafe conditions. The Supreme Court granted partial summary judgment on liability, finding negligence per se based on a violation of Coast Guard Regulation 46 CFR 42.15-75 (d). Defendants' argument that the regulation did not apply to their 'permissively manned' barge was rejected. A subsequent trial on damages resulted in a $5,299,210.21 verdict for the plaintiffs. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decisions, upholding the summary judgment, the preclusion of defendants' medical expert, the jury instructions, and finding the damages award not excessive given plaintiff's severe injuries including a fractured hip and permanent disability.

Jones ActMaritime LawNegligence Per SeCoast Guard RegulationsBarge AccidentLadder FallPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentExpert TestimonyMedical Causation
References
43
Showing 1-10 of 666 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