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. Index No. 23434/19|Appeal No. 5904|Case No. 2025-00403
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2026

Santacruz v. 58 Gerry St LLC

This case involves an appeal from an order denying defendants' motion to amend their answer, vacate the note of issue, and compel additional discovery. Defendants sought to assert an affirmative defense and counterclaim for fraud based on an unrelated federal RICO complaint alleging a conspiracy by plaintiff's former attorneys and medical providers. The Supreme Court denied the motion to amend and to vacate the note of issue. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified the order to grant defendants' motion for additional discovery, specifically ordering plaintiff to appear for further deposition regarding the RICO action, without vacating the note of issue, and otherwise affirmed the Supreme Court's decision. The court reasoned that while the fraud allegations were unproven and insufficient for an affirmative defense, further deposition was warranted.

Fraud AllegationsRICO ActionDiscovery DisputeFurther DepositionMotion to AmendNote of IssueAppellate ReviewAffirmative DefenseCounterclaimWorkers' Compensation Claims
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Herman & New York City Transit Authority

The petitioners sought to vacate an arbitration award issued by Theodore Kheel, the impartial chairman of the transit industry. Their grievance concerned work pick rules which they claimed violated their seniority status and previous agreements between the Authority and its employees' unions. The arbitrator had denied their grievance, leading the petitioners to allege partiality and misbehavior on his part for consulting the Transport Workers Union. The court, however, found no basis for these charges, noting the informal nature of the arbitration and the arbitrator's prerogative to seek the union's opinion given the potential impact on other employees. Ultimately, the court concluded there was no impartiality or misbehavior and dismissed the petition to vacate the award.

arbitration awardvacate awardpartialitymisbehaviorwork rulesseniority rightsunion agreementgrievanceimpartial chairmanTransit Authority
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 06, 2002

Cosby v. R.G. Delivery Service, Inc.

This case concerns a plaintiff's appeal regarding the denial of their motion to vacate a dismissal order. The original action for personal injuries, sustained in the course of employment when boxes allegedly delivered by the defendant toppled, was dismissed due to the plaintiff's attorney's failure to attend a post-note-of-issue conference. The Supreme Court affirmed the denial, citing the plaintiff's unexplained four-year delay in seeking to vacate the dismissal and the apparent lack of merit of the underlying action due to Workers' Compensation Law implications. Additionally, the court found the plaintiff's evidence regarding the stacking of boxes to lack sufficient probative value.

Personal InjuryDismissalVacate OrderLaw Office FailurePost-Note-of-Issue ConferenceWorkers' Compensation LawProbative ValueMedical ReportsDelay in MotionAppellate Review
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Braun v. Carey

This case involves an appeal by defendants from an order denying their motion to vacate a summary judgment previously granted to the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued for legal services, and the defendants initially denied retainer and services, though their answer contained an inadvertent admission. After the plaintiff obtained summary judgment, the defendants sought to vacate it, arguing they were denied the opportunity to respond to late-served reply affidavits and that triable issues of fact existed regarding the retainer and the extent of services. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' motion to vacate, but the appellate court reversed, finding that genuine issues of material fact were indeed present, making summary judgment inappropriate. Consequently, the appellate court granted the defendants' motion to vacate the original order and allowed them leave to serve an amended answer.

AppealSummary JudgmentMotion to VacateAmended AnswerTriable Issues of FactLegal ServicesRetainer AgreementProcedural ErrorAppellate ReviewCivil Practice Rules
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 17, 1998

Onorino v. Halmar Equities, Inc.

This case involves an appeal arising from a personal injury action. The defendant third-party plaintiff, Halmar Equities, Inc., appealed the denial of its motion for conditional summary judgment on common-law indemnification. The plaintiff cross-appealed the denial of his motion for summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). Additionally, the third-party defendant, Onorino Bros., cross-appealed the denial of its motion to vacate the note of issue. The appellate court modified the original order by granting Halmar's motion for conditional summary judgment against Onorino Bros., finding no evidence that Halmar controlled or supervised the work. The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's motion due to unresolved questions of fact regarding the accident's cause, and also affirmed the denial of Onorino Bros.' motion to vacate the note of issue due to a lack of good cause.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentIndemnificationThird-Party LitigationLabor Law § 240(1)Scaffold AccidentWorkers' Compensation ClaimVicarious LiabilityFactual DisputeAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

DeLury v. City of New York

Justice Murphy dissents from a decision that denied a motion to vacate a stay, arguing that vacating the stay is crucial to maintain the status quo and prevent irreparable harm to the plaintiffs. The dissent highlights that the City is protected by a $1,000,000 bond, making further delay harmless to the city, while immediate firings could render an expedited appeal moot. The core issue revolves around a contractual clause regarding guaranteed two-year employment for sanitation workers in exchange for waiving rights under Labor Law § 220, which the City argues is invalid under its Administrative Code, allowing for dismissals due to lack of work. Murphy also raises a factual issue regarding whether the City can fire permanent employees while retaining provisional ones. The dissent concludes that the potential irreparable harm to plaintiffs' benefits outweighs the minimal harm to the City, advocating for vacating the stay and directing an expedited appeal or trial.

Stay MotionIrreparable HarmStatus QuoExpedited AppealMootnessSanitation WorkersContractual DisputeGuaranteed EmploymentWaiver of RightsPrevailing Wage
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Klikocki & New York Department of Corrections

This appeal concerns the vacatur of an arbitration award. The petitioner sought to overturn the award, alleging that the respondent fraudulently destroyed a crucial key log that would have supported the petitioner's claim of a work-related injury. The arbitration stemmed from the petitioner's discharge for misconduct, specifically for filing a workers' compensation claim for an injury purportedly sustained at work but alleged by a former girlfriend to have occurred while playing frisbee. The court found insufficient clear and convincing evidence of fraud, noting the key log's destruction was part of a routine record disposal and not maliciously intended. Furthermore, the court deemed the log's probative value limited regarding the central issue of the injury's true origin. Consequently, the Supreme Court's order vacating the arbitration award was reversed, the petition dismissed, and the original arbitration award confirmed.

FraudArbitration AwardVacaturWorkers' Compensation ClaimEvidence DestructionCPLR 7511MisconductAppealDue DiligenceKey Log
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pocketbook Workers Union, Local 1 v. Centra Leather Goods Corp.

This case involves a judicial review of an arbitration award, initiated by a motion to confirm and a cross-motion to vacate the award. The underlying dispute concerned an employer's alleged relocation of its plant from New York City to Oklahoma. The arbitrator issued an award enjoining the employer from moving, mandating the return of shipped machinery, and providing for lost wages. The court addressed multiple objections, including procedural issues, arbitrator impartiality, the scope of equitable relief in arbitration, and jurisdictional challenges. While most objections were dismissed, the court expressed reservations about enforcing the mandatory injunction for machinery return due to insufficient proof. Ultimately, the motion to confirm the arbitration award was granted, and the cross-motion to vacate was denied, with a directive to settle the judgment as indicated.

ArbitrationEquitable ReliefInjunctionLabor DisputeContract InterpretationJudicial ReviewBankruptcy ActLabor Management Relations ActArbitrator ImpartialityMandatory Injunction
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cooper v. Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc.

Plaintiff Connie Cooper, a sales representative for Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., was terminated after a history of poor attendance and extended absences due to medical issues, including a non-work related hand disorder and bronchitis. She filed a workers' compensation claim for mold exposure, which was subsequently denied, as was her request for disability leave. Wyndham fired Ms. Cooper for violating its absentee policy. Cooper sued, alleging retaliatory discharge for filing a workers' compensation claim. The court granted Wyndham's motion for summary judgment, concluding that Cooper failed to provide compelling evidence of a causal link between her workers' compensation claim and her termination, noting that temporal proximity alone was insufficient and her prior attendance record was unsatisfactory.

Retaliatory DischargeWorkers' Compensation ClaimSummary Judgment StandardAbsentee Policy ViolationCausal Connection Employment TerminationTemporal Proximity Employment LawEmployment At-Will DoctrinePrima Facie Case RetaliationMedical LeaveAttendance Record
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Szarewicz v. Alboro Crane Rental Corp.

The interlocutory judgment from Supreme Court, Kings County, favoring the plaintiff against Alboro Crane Rental Corp. on liability, was unanimously reversed and vacated on appeal. The plaintiff, a structural steel worker employed by Harrod Steel Erectors, was injured when knocked off a steel beam, allegedly due to a negligent crane operator. A key issue was whether an employer-employee relationship existed between the operator and Alboro, which owned and leased the crane to Harrod. The court found insufficient evidence to establish this relationship, noting the operator was not on Alboro's payroll and Alboro lacked control over his work. Consequently, the complaint against Alboro was dismissed, as liability could not be based on the rental agreement or control theory.

Crane accidentliabilityemployer-employee relationshipvicarious liabilitynegligenceleased equipmentappellate reviewjudgment reversalstructural steel workercrane operator control
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 16,041 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