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. 2021 NY Slip Op 02769 [195 AD3d 140]
Regular Panel Decision
May 04, 2021

Robinson v. Great Performances/Artists as Waitresses, Inc.

This class action sought unpaid gratuities under Labor Law § 196-d. The central question was whether an employer has a right to contractual indemnification from a third party for claims brought under this statute. The court determined that contractual indemnification in this context is against public policy, citing similar rulings on other labor laws like the FLSA. The Supreme Court had dismissed the third-party complaint, and this appellate decision affirmed that dismissal, stating that allowing such indemnification would undermine employers' willingness to comply with their statutory obligations.

unpaid gratuitiesLabor Lawcontractual indemnificationpublic policyemployer liabilitywage violationsFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)third-party claimsclass actionappellate review
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of McKenzie v. Revere Copper Products

The claimant sustained a work-related back injury in 2002 and received workers' compensation benefits. After it was discovered she was working as a waitress, a question arose regarding a potential violation of Workers’ Compensation Law § 114-a for misrepresentation. Both the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board found no violation, though benefits were adjusted due to her current employment. The employer appealed, contending the claimant failed to disclose her employment. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that no violation occurred, as the claimant had informed the employer of her intent to seek work and readily disclosed her waitress job when asked. The court also deemed the employer's request to cross-examine medical professionals untimely.

Workers' CompensationMisrepresentationFraudDisabilityBack InjuryEmployment DisclosureAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceUntimely RequestReduced Earnings
References
7
Case No. ADJ4247142 (GOL 0097068) ADJ2035897 (GOL 0097069)
Regular
Dec 15, 2008

JESSICA SIMNITT vs. COWANS & COWANS LLC dba DENNY'S, CIGA for MUNICIPAL MUTUAL, MICHAEL A. COWANS, DONALD G. COWANS, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves a waitress, Jessica Simnitt, who claimed both a specific back injury on January 28, 2003, and a subsequent cumulative back injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the medical evidence regarding the specific January 2003 back injury was inconsistent with the applicant's testimony about when her back pain began. The Board rescinded the original decisions and returned the matter for further proceedings to clarify the medical record.

CIGAMunicipal MutualUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundQualified Medical EvaluatorQMEspecific injurycumulative traumacompensable consequencemedical historysupplemental medical record
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jarvis v. Stewart Airport Diner

The claimant, a waitress with a history of back problems, sought workers' compensation benefits after experiencing sudden numbness while working. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled that she suffered an occupational disease due to the aggravation of a preexisting dormant condition, awarding her benefits. The employer appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's ruling, concluding that there was substantial evidence to support the finding that the claimant's employment aggravated her dormant back condition, leading to a new disability.

Occupational diseasePreexisting conditionAggravation of injuryWorkers' compensation benefitsWaitressingBack injuryDisabilitySubstantial evidenceRepetitive occupational microtraumaDormant condition
References
5
Case No. ADJ12202677
Regular
Jun 18, 2025

ANA MONZON vs. IHOP, TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Ana Monzon sought reconsideration of an April 1, 2025 Findings, Awards and Order (F&A) regarding an industrial injury sustained while employed as a waitress for IHOP. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the F&A, and deferred issues related to permanent disability, apportionment, and attorney fees. The matter was returned to the trial level for further development of the record, particularly concerning psychiatric impairment. The WCAB affirmed the WCJ's original finding that the applicant did not sustain injuries to her eyes or internal systems.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Awards and OrderQualified Medical Evaluatortreating physicianindustrial injurycervical spineright shoulderpsycheophthalmology
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lanzetta v. Florio's Enterprises, Inc.

Carmela Lanzetta, a waitress, sued Florio’s Enterprises and its owners Ralph and Lawrence Amoruso for unpaid wages under the FLSA and New York State Labor Law. Lanzetta claimed she worked only for tips for four years, while defendants asserted they paid hourly wages. The court found defendants failed to keep proper records and violated minimum wage, overtime, and spread-of-hours laws. Additionally, defendants illegally retained portions of Lanzetta’s tips. The court ruled in favor of Lanzetta, awarding her $127,938.31 in compensatory and liquidated damages against all defendants jointly and severally.

Wage theftFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)New York Labor LawMinimum wage violationOvertime payTip creditRecord-keeping violationsLiquidated damagesEquitable tollingEmployer liability
References
36
Case No. ADJ2560441 (STK 0197806) ADJ4237532 (STK 0125743)
Regular
Jan 19, 2010

BONNIE GRAVES (FREITAS) vs. ALMOND TREE RESTAURANT, CALIFORNIA GUARANTEE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, For FREMONT INSURANCE COMPANY, In Liquidation, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves two cumulative injury claims for shoulder injuries sustained by the applicant waitress. Fremont Insurance Company, initially the insurer, became insolvent, and CIGA subsequently took over its obligations. CIGA sought reimbursement from SCIF, the subsequent insurer, for medical treatment provided to the applicant. The WCJ initially denied CIGA full reimbursement, finding the issue of 100% reimbursement for non-permanent disability benefits was not properly raised at trial. However, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding CIGA sufficiently raised the issue of full reimbursement in its petitions and supporting documents, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

California Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAState Compensation Insurance FundSCIFFremont Insurance Companyliquidationindustrial injurybilateral shouldersleft shoulderpermanent disability
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 21, 1982

In re the Claim of Caryl

The claimant was terminated for misconduct following a company awards dinner. During the event, he admittedly consumed a significant amount of alcohol, engaged in disruptive behavior including throwing objects, harassing waitresses, and making obscene gestures and insulting comments to speakers. He also attempted to assault a superior and threatened another, leading to his arrest. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board initially granted benefits, deeming the misconduct not 'in connection with' his employment. However, the court reversed this, ruling that the employer-sponsored event was indeed connected to employment, and employees must uphold behavioral standards even off-duty, thus disqualifying the claimant from benefits.

misconductunemployment insuranceemployee terminationcompany eventoff-duty conductintoxicationworkplace behaviorappeal boardemployer responsibilityemployee obligations
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Salinas v. Diner

A claimant, a waitress, suffered a fractured hip and filed for workers' compensation benefits. Her case was established for a work-related injury, and a hearing was held to determine her average weekly wage, specifically regarding tip income. The Workers' Compensation Board calculated her average weekly wage as $111.30 based on reported salary and tips. The claimant appealed, contending that unreported tip income of $266 should have been included, which would raise her average weekly wage to $199.97. The court affirmed the Board's decision, stating that Workers' Compensation Law § 14 and 12 NYCRR 357.1 [c] mandate that tip valuation be based on amounts reported to the employer, absent a specific agreement.

Workers' CompensationAverage Weekly WageTip IncomeUnreported IncomeWage CalculationWaitressFractured HipBoard Decision AppealStatutory InterpretationNYCRR
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Ryan v. Metropolitan Property & Liability

The claimant sustained a stress-related injury while employed by Metropolitan Property & Liability, also holding concurrent employment as a waitress. Her average weekly wage was calculated based on both employments. Metropolitan's insurance carrier, Travelers/Aetna, sought reimbursement from the Special Funds Conservation Committee under Workers’ Compensation Law § 14 (6) and § 15 (8). The Workers’ Compensation Board rescinded the initial reimbursement, ruling the entire award should be charged against the carrier as its maximum liability was $150. The carrier and Metropolitan appealed this decision, but the appellate court affirmed the Board's ruling, stating that the employer's liability would not be greater than under previous law for dissimilar concurrent employment, thus warranting no reimbursement from the Special Funds.

Workers' CompensationConcurrent EmploymentStress-related InjuryAverage Weekly WageReimbursementSpecial Funds Conservation CommitteePermanent Partial DisabilityLump-sum AdjustmentInsurance Carrier LiabilityDissimilar Employment
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 16 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