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

Video Aid Corp. v. Town of Wallkill

The case discusses whether Video Aid Corp. should be reimbursed for an unconstitutional $27,000 water sewer tap-in fee paid to the Town of Wallkill to obtain a building permit. This dissenting opinion, authored by Bellacosa, J., argues that the Appellate Division's order for reimbursement was correct, stating that the payment was made under legal duress. The dissent highlights that the Town unlawfully exacted the fee, impeding Video Aid's business expansion, and that Video Aid's immediate lawsuit constituted "authentic resistance." It draws on precedents affirming that municipalities cannot manipulate responsibilities for revenue generation and that involuntary payments, even without formal protest, warrant recovery, ultimately advocating for affirmance of the reimbursement order.

Unconstitutional feeLegal duressInvoluntary paymentBuilding permitMunicipal feesReimbursementTown of WallkillVideo Aid Corp.Business expansionAppellate Division
References
11
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 05331
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 05, 2016

People v. Bonie

This case involves an appeal by nonparty News 12 The Bronx, L.L.C., and its representative Dina Sforza, against an order compelling compliance with a subpoena for unaired video footage. The People sought the footage from an interview with defendant Nasean Bonie, who was indicted for the murder of Ramona Moore. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted the People's motion to compel, directing an in camera review and denying News 12's cross-motion to quash the subpoena. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified this order. It directed disclosure only of specific portions of the video footage where Bonie discusses killing the victim or their relationship, finding that the People met the necessary showing under New York's Shield Law for these parts, and otherwise affirmed the lower court's decision. The court clarified that the trial judge need not issue further findings.

Subpoena enforcementJournalistic privilegeShield LawNonconfidential materialIn camera reviewCircumstantial evidenceMurder indictmentVideo footageAppellate reviewFreedom of the press
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 03, 2004

Ulloa v. Universal Music and Video Distribution Corp.

Plaintiff Demme Ulloa initiated legal action against Universal Music and Video Distribution Corp., Island Def Jam Music Group, Roc-A-Fella Records, LLC, and Shawn Carter, alleging copyright infringement, false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, unjust enrichment, joint authorship, and an accounting of sales. Ulloa claimed to have spontaneously created a vocal counter-melody for Shawn Carter's song "Izzo (H.O.V.A.)" which was later used without proper credit or compensation. The Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the claims of joint authorship and Lanham Act violations, dismissing them. However, it denied both parties' motions for summary judgment regarding copyright infringement, citing unresolved factual disputes concerning originality, work-for-hire status, and implied license. Additionally, the defendants' motions to dismiss the unjust enrichment claim and to bifurcate the trial were denied.

Copyright InfringementLanham ActUnjust EnrichmentJoint AuthorshipSummary JudgmentWork for HireImplied LicenseMusical CompositionSound RecordingOriginality
References
31
Case No. ADJ9070509
Regular
Jan 05, 2018

GIHAN MOSAAD vs. WALMART STORES, INC., ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

This case concerns the admissibility of store surveillance video footage from the applicant's date of injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, an extraordinary remedy, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board agreed with the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if a future decision proves adverse. The WCJ determined the video was relevant to the nature, extent, and apportionment of the applicant's injury, noting it shows the applicant using a cane and stocking shelves before being removed on a stretcher. The Board concluded the applicant failed to demonstrate that removal was necessary before a final decision.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdmissibility of VideoStore Surveillance VideoDate of InjuryWorkers' Compensation JudgeFindings & Order
References
2
Case No. 2019-06-0815
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 06, 2019

Stewart, Michael v. Don Kennedy Roofing

Michael Stewart, an employee of Don Kennedy Roofing, filed a Request for Expedited Hearing challenging the denial of his workers' compensation claim. He alleged a shoulder injury from a fall on a wet restroom floor at work on March 26, 2019. Don Kennedy Roofing denied the claim, asserting Mr. Stewart did not fall as described and presenting edited video surveillance footage and testimonies to support their position. The Court found the employer's video editing troubling but noted Mr. Stewart failed to provide contradictory evidence. The Court denied Mr. Stewart's requested relief, ruling that he was unlikely to prevail at a hearing on the merits due to insufficient evidence.

Workplace InjuryFall AccidentShoulder InjuryExpedited HearingDenial of ClaimSurveillance VideoEmployee TestimonyEmployer DefenseBurden of ProofMedical Benefits
References
2
Case No. 2024-20-6739
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 01, 2025

GILLIAM, SHERRY v. ISABEL TAYLOR IRREVOCABLE TRUST

Sherry Gilliam, an overnight caregiver, alleged a right knee injury on September 1, 2024, claiming she tripped on an electrical cord at the Isabel Taylor Irrevocable Trust. The Trust denied the claim, asserting the injury was idiopathic and related to a preexisting condition. Evidence included conflicting testimony from Ms. Gilliam, video footage, and testimony from Ms. Owens and Ms. Lowe, which contradicted Ms. Gilliam's account of tripping. The Court found Ms. Gilliam's testimony incredible, noting the video showed her walking into doors rather than tripping. Ultimately, the Court denied Ms. Gilliam's request for benefits, concluding she failed to prove her injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of her employment.

Idiopathic InjuryCausation DisputeCredibility FindingsKnee Injury ClaimCaregiver EmploymentExpedited Benefits DenialWorkers' Compensation AppealsEvidence ReviewPre-existing InjuryEmployment Hazard
References
1
Case No. 2015-05-0152
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 06, 2015

Daugherty, Darylin v. Walmart Associates, Inc.

Darylin Daugherty, a 67-year-old cashier for Wal-Mart, filed for an expedited hearing seeking medical treatment for a hernia. She reported feeling a burning pull in her stomach after lifting a large item at work on March 9, 2015, and later noticed a bulge. She was diagnosed with a ventral/umbilical hernia by Dr. Sara Bush and Dr. Charles Haney. However, Wal-Mart's investigation, including transaction logs and video footage, did not corroborate her claim of lifting a large case of water. The Court found Ms. Daugherty unlikely to prevail at a hearing on the merits, citing inconsistencies in her statements and lack of video evidence for the alleged incident. Consequently, her claim for medical benefits was denied.

Expedited HearingHernia ClaimMedical Benefits DenialBurden of ProofEmployment CausationVideo EvidenceIncident Report DiscrepancyTennessee Workers' Compensation LawStatutory InterpretationEmployee Testimony Inconsistencies
References
3
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 06490 [153 AD3d 1460]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 14, 2017

Matter of Eardley v. Unatego Cent. Sch. Dist.

Claimant, Bill Eardley, who is legally blind and worked as a cleaner for Unatego Central School District, sustained work-related injuries in June 2008 that led to a classification of permanent total disability and the award of workers' compensation benefits. Subsequently, the school district and its carrier alleged a violation of Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a, claiming Eardley made false statements based on video surveillance footage. The footage depicted Eardley performing minimal activities, such as helping move a popcorn machine and assisting his disabled daughter, at amateur football games organized by his wife, which was a nonprofit endeavor. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board found no violation, concluding Eardley's activities were not inconsistent with his representations. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, determining it was supported by substantial evidence and upholding the Board's role as the sole arbiter of witness credibility.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsPermanent Total DisabilityFraud AllegationVideo SurveillanceClaimant CredibilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionVolunteer ActivitiesFalse Statement Representation
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 1987

Promovision Video Display Corp. v. Intech Leasing Corp.

This case concerns an appeal where Promovision Video Display Corporation sued Intech Leasing Corporation for breach of contract and fraud. The dispute arose from a series of integrated agreements, including a sales agreement with an arbitration clause between Promovision and Fujitsu Systems of America, Inc., and a financing agreement between Promovision and Intech. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, initially denied Intech's motion to compel arbitration and granted Promovision's cross-motion to stay arbitration. The appellate court reversed this order, ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act applied and that the arbitration clause, incorporated by reference into the financing agreement, governed the claims between Promovision and Intech. Consequently, the parties were directed to proceed to arbitration, and the action was stayed.

ArbitrationBreach of ContractFederal Arbitration ActIntegrated ContractsAssignmentFinancing AgreementSales AgreementMotion to Compel ArbitrationStay of ActionAppellate Review
References
11
Case No. ADJ7253570
Regular
May 20, 2015

MICHELLE FELDHAKE vs. HOLLYWOOD VIDEO, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant, Michelle Feldhake, and defendants Hollywood Video and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. The defendants petitioned for removal of an order that closed discovery and set the case for trial, arguing it would cause irreparable harm by preventing them from obtaining vocational evidence. The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinded the order, and returned the case to the trial level due to ambiguity regarding the timing of the applicant's vocational expert's report. This action allows defendants to potentially obtain and present their own vocational evidence.

Petition for RemovalDiminished Future Earning CapacityVocational ExpertClosing DiscoveryDue ProcessIrreparable HarmVocational EvidenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceFindings Award and OrderHome Healthcare
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 227 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