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

Ferra v. County of Wayne

John Ferra, an employee of J & J Piping Corporation, was severely injured after falling from a ladder while working at the Wayne County jail construction site. He sued the County of Wayne, the building owner, for violating Labor Law § 240 (1), which mandates providing adequate safety equipment. The court found that the defendant owner breached this statutory duty, which proximately caused Ferra's injuries, thus imposing absolute liability. Consequently, the lower court's denial of the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment was reversed, and the motion was granted. The defendant's cross-appeal was also deemed abandoned.

Construction AccidentLadder FallLabor Law ViolationStatutory DutyAbsolute LiabilitySummary JudgmentOwner LiabilityProximate CausePersonal InjuryAppellate Decision
References
3
Case No. 87 SSM 43
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 26, 2018

Wayne Schnapp v. Miller's Launch

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed an order in a case between Wayne Schnapp, the respondent, and Miller's Launch, Inc., the appellant. The court found that triable issues of fact exist concerning whether Miller's Launch, Inc. breached its duty of care owed to Mr. Schnapp. This duty of care is established under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, specifically 33 USC § 905[b]. The certified question presented in the case was answered in the affirmative. Chief Judge DiFiore and several other judges concurred in this decision, while Judge Feinman took no part.

Workers' CompensationDuty of CareLongshore ActBreach of DutyTriable Issues of FactOrder AffirmedCertified QuestionAppellate ReviewMaritime LawPersonal Injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ7503681
Regular
Jul 24, 2012

WAYNE RADLOFF vs. ATLANTA FALCONS

Defendant National Union petitioned for the Workers' Compensation Judge's disqualification based on unspecified grounds, requesting reassignment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition because it lacked the required affidavit or declaration detailing facts for disqualification. Furthermore, the petition was not verified, violating WCAB Rule 10842(b). Consequently, the Board denied the request for disqualification and reassignment.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDWayne RadloffAtlanta FalconsADJ7503681Petition for DisqualificationCCP § 641(f)CCP § 641(g)Labor Code section 5311WCAB Rule 10452affidavit
References
0
Case No. 533503
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Wayne Charles Belfiore

Claimant, a hospital delivery driver, sustained head and traumatic brain injuries in February 2020 after a fall at work. The employer and its workers' compensation carrier disputed the claim's causal relationship. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim based on an independent medical examination, despite the carrier's absence from the hearing. The carrier's application for Board review was denied by the Workers' Compensation Board due to noncompliance with 12 NYCRR 300.13 (b) regarding preserving objections and submitting additional evidence. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding no abuse of discretion in the denial of review or in refusing to consider the additional documentary evidence.

Workers' Compensation BoardAppellate ReviewProcedural ComplianceMedical EvidenceIndependent Medical ExaminationObjection PreservationAdministrative ReviewClaim EstablishmentInjury CausationNew York Regulations
References
11
Case No. 532233
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Jerry Wayne Moore

Claimant, a truck driver, allegedly sustained a back injury in October 2015 and filed a workers' compensation claim, asserting it occurred during vehicle maintenance. The employer and carrier controverted the claim, questioning causation. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge disallowed the claim, affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board, finding the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment. Claimant's request for reconsideration was denied. The Appellate Division affirmed both decisions, concluding substantial evidence supported the finding of non-compensability and found no procedural errors.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryCausationCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentMedical EvidencePhysician Assistant TestimonyNeurosurgeon TestimonyReconsiderationBoard Review
References
15
Case No. CA 14-01767
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 20, 2015

WOLFE, PHILLIP v. WAYNE-DALTON CORPORATION

Phillip Wolfe, a warehouse manager, sustained injuries after falling from a safety ladder while attempting to repair an overhead receiving door cable. He initiated an action against the warehouse owners, including Joanne Leska and Robert Tarson, Jr., alleging a violation of Labor Law § 240 (1). The Supreme Court initially granted Wolfe partial summary judgment on liability, deeming the activity a protected "repair." On appeal, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, modified the Supreme Court's order, affirming that Wolfe was engaged in a protected activity but finding a triable issue of fact regarding whether the injury was due to an elevation-related risk under the statute. The appellate court also affirmed the dismissal of the defendants' immunity defense under Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 11 and 29 (6) and upheld the denial of their motion for leave to renew.

Ladder fallWarehouse injuryLabor Law § 240 (1) claimWorkers' Compensation immunitySummary judgmentAppellate reviewElevation-related riskOverhead door repairTriable issue of factNew York Appellate Division
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Wilson

Petitioner Wayne Wilson filed a motion to vacate his conviction for conspiracy to distribute marijuana and attempted possession with intent to distribute, alleging six instances of ineffective assistance of counsel. His claims included failure to move to suppress post-arrest statements, failure to formulate a trial strategy, failure to review and investigate evidence, failure to discuss a plea offer, failure to call certain witnesses, and failure to effectively cross-examine government witnesses. The Court, presided over by Judge William F. Kuntz, II, denied the motion in its entirety. The Court found that counsel's performance was not deficient under the Strickland standard for any of the claims and that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice. Additionally, the Court denied Petitioner's request for an evidentiary hearing, concluding it was unnecessary given the existing record.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel28 U.S.C. § 2255Motion to VacateCriminal ConvictionSixth AmendmentDrug ConspiracyMarijuana DistributionPlea BargainingTrial StrategyWitness Testimony
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2011

BEDWORTH-HOLGADO, JODI M. v. HOLGADO, JOSEPH M.

This case involves an appeal concerning an order from the Family Court, Wayne County, which directed petitioner's attorney, Maureen A. Pineau, Esq., to pay $1,600 in attorneys' fees to respondent Allen & O’Brien. The fees were imposed due to a finding of frivolous conduct by the petitioner's attorney in serving a subpoena that sought privileged testimony from a licensed clinical social worker, as protected by CPLR 4508. The appellate court affirmed the finding that the conduct was frivolous and warranted the imposition of costs. The order was modified in the exercise of discretion, updating the deadline for payment of the attorneys' fees to July 22, 2011, while otherwise affirming the original decision.

Frivolous ConductAttorneys' FeesSubpoenaPrivileged TestimonyCPLR 4508Family Court Act Article 6Appellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionCosts SanctionLegal Ethics
References
4
Case No. ADJ8740864, ADJ8764475, ADJ8960944
Regular
Oct 16, 2025

KATHY BRANDOW vs. LAW OFFICES OF WAYNE SINGER, THE HARTFORD

Applicant Kathy Brandow sought to disqualify a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), alleging bias and conflict of interest. The defendants, Law Offices of Wayne Singer and The Hartford, responded, and the WCJ filed a report recommending denial of the petition. After reviewing all submissions, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for disqualification, finding no grounds for bias or prejudice. The Board further cautioned the applicant against repeatedly filing unmeritorious motions, warning that such conduct could lead to vexatious litigant proceedings.

WCABPetition for DisqualificationWCJ biasconflict of interestLabor Code 5311Code of Civil Procedure 641unqualified opinionenmitybiasWCAB Rule 10960
References
7
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 03740 [139 AD3d 855]
Regular Panel Decision
May 11, 2016

Matter of Headley v. Headley

This case involves an appeal by Amalia Headley (mother) against Wayne Headley (father) concerning a Supreme Court order that mandated equal sharing of parenting coordinator fees. The parties, who divorced in 2008, shared joint legal custody of their child. Following disputes over visitation and the father's motion to modify custody, a parenting coordinator was appointed to mediate and oversee the parenting plan. The Supreme Court directed both parties to share the coordinator's costs equally to ensure shared responsibility. The mother subsequently moved to vacate this directive, citing financial hardship. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, emphasizing that in the absence of clear indication that one party was more culpable than the other, fees should be shared equally. The court also found no evidence that the lower court failed to consider the parties' financial situations.

Family LawCustody DisputeVisitation RightsParenting CoordinatorAppellate ReviewFinancial ResponsibilityChild's Best InterestsMatrimonial LawDivorce ProceedingsCourt Fees
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 71 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