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
Nov 03, 2003

Lehman Brothers, Inc. v. Wu

This memorandum order addresses a motion to dismiss brought by third-party defendant Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. against third-party plaintiff Wei Wu's claim for contribution. Wei Wu was previously accused of copyright infringement by plaintiff Lehman Brothers, Inc. The core legal question examined by the court was whether the Copyright Act, either explicitly or implicitly, or federal common law, establishes a right to contribution between a primary and an ancillary tortfeasor in copyright infringement cases. The court concluded that neither the Copyright Act nor federal common law provides for such a right to contribution. Consequently, the motion to dismiss filed by Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. against Wei Wu's claim for copyright contribution was granted.

Copyright InfringementContribution ClaimThird-Party LitigationMotion to DismissFederal Common LawCopyright ActAncillary TortfeasorPrimary TortfeasorJudicial InterpretationStatutory Construction
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 22, 1999

Ma v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.

The defendants, Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., and Zhidong Wu, appealed from an order denying summary judgment to Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. The plaintiff cross-appealed from the same order, which granted summary judgment dismissing the action against Zhidong Wu. The appellate court dismissed Zhidong Wu's appeal on the grounds that he was not aggrieved by the provision. The court affirmed the order denying summary judgment to Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., finding it failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law regarding its alleged negligent maintenance. The plaintiff's cause of action against Zhidong Wu and any vicarious liability claim against Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., for Zhidong Wu's negligence were barred by the Workers’ Compensation Law.

Automobile accidentPersonal injurySummary judgmentNegligenceVicarious liabilityWorkers' CompensationAppellate reviewCross-appealJudicial dismissalOrder affirmed
References
6
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 03169 [161 AD3d 813]
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 2018

Yao Zong Wu v. Zhen Jia Yang

This case concerns an appeal from orders regarding personal injuries sustained by Yao Zong Wu, who fell from a ladder while working on property owned by Zhen Jia Yang et al. The plaintiff alleged violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The Supreme Court initially denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and granted the defendants' motion to dismiss both causes of action. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's summary judgment motion. However, it modified the second order by reinstating the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action, concluding that the defendants failed to establish as a matter of law that the ladder provided proper protection or that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injuries. The dismissal of the Labor Law § 241 (6) cause of action, predicated on Industrial Code § 23-1.21 (b) (4) (ii), was affirmed, as the alleged violation was found not to be a proximate cause of the accident.

Personal InjuryLabor LawLadder FallSummary JudgmentProximate CauseAppellate ReviewConstruction Site SafetyIndustrial CodeSafety DevicesWorkplace Accident
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bell Aircraft Corp. v. Siegler

The court affirmed both the final and intermediate orders without costs in this matter. The case primarily involved an appeal from an order that had found several defendants guilty of criminal contempt of court. Additionally, the appeal also addressed an order which denied a motion seeking to resettle an order of commitment. Furthermore, a motion to vacate and perpetually stay the orders of commitment was also denied. All presiding judges concurred with the decision.

Criminal ContemptOrder of CommitmentResettlement MotionVacate MotionStay OrdersAppellate ReviewOrder AffirmedJudicial Concurrence
References
1
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 03582
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2021

Mowla v. Baozhu Wu

Plaintiff MD Rafiquil Mowla was injured while working at the single-family residence owned by defendant Baozhu Wu. While climbing an extension ladder to access a garage roof to clean brick columns, a brick column crumbled, causing him to fall and sustain personal injuries. Mowla subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 200, as well as common-law negligence. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240(1) claim but denied dismissal of the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims. The defendant appealed this denial. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the defendant failed to establish prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence causes of action, specifically by not demonstrating that the dangerous condition did not exist for a sufficient length of time to allow for discovery and remedy, or that the condition was latent.

personal injurypremises liabilityladder falldefective conditionhomeowner liabilitysummary judgment motionLabor Law § 200common-law negligenceduty to maintain propertyactual notice
References
18
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 05182 [208 AD3d 1211]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 14, 2022

Zhiying Wang v. Bin Wu

In this case, the plaintiff, Zhiying Wang, a former live-in nanny and housekeeper, sued defendants Bin Wu et al. alleging violations of Labor Law article 6 and the Domestic Workers' Bill of Rights. The defendants appealed a Supreme Court order denying their motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing they did not reside at the Syosset property where service was made. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the process server's affidavits established prima facie evidence of proper service. The defendants' denials were deemed conclusory and insufficient to rebut the presumption, especially since their children lived at the Syosset property, which the court determined to be their 'dwelling place or usual place of abode' for service purposes.

Personal JurisdictionService of ProcessDomestic WorkersNannyHousekeeperAppellate ReviewAffidavit of ServiceUsual Place of AbodeLabor Law ComplianceNew York Courts
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2011

Casas v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal of an order from the Supreme Court, New York County, regarding a conditional preclusion order issued in October 2006. The defendant's answer was deemed stricken due to their failure to comply with discovery requirements within 30 days, making the order self-executing. The court found that the defendant failed to provide a reasonable excuse for non-compliance or a meritorious defense. The order was modified to prevent the plaintiff from litigating an accident-related disability claim subsequent to September 5, 2008, citing a preclusive Workers’ Compensation Board decision. The Appellate Division panel unanimously concurred with the modified decision, affirming the striking of the defendant's answer while imposing a limitation on the plaintiff's disability claims.

Discovery SanctionsConditional Preclusion OrderWorkers' Compensation BoardAccident-related DisabilitySummary JudgmentDefault JudgmentMeritorious DefenseSelf-Executing OrderAppellate DivisionNew York Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dubinsky v. Joseph Love, Inc.

A motion seeking an order to affirm a prior order and judgment and to vacate a previous determination and order of the court was considered and denied by the judicial panel. The panel included Justices Martin, Townley, Callahan, and Peck.

Motion PracticeOrder AffirmanceJudgment AffirmancePrior DeterminationOrder VacaturJudicial Panel DecisionAppellate Review
References
1
Case No. ADJ4522242 (VNO 0452421) ADJ522765 (VNO 0452422)
Regular
May 26, 2011

PAUL ALLGOOD vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted lien claimant's petition for removal to rescind an Administrative Law Judge's order compelling Dr. Baden's appearance at trial. The Board found no good cause was established for Dr. Baden's direct examination and that the order was not a final, appealable decision. Removal was granted to prevent prejudice to the lien claimant, and the order for Dr. Baden's appearance was rescinded. The Board also dismissed the lien claimant's prior petition for reconsideration.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ OrderDr. Scott BadenGood CauseMedical WitnessDirect ExaminationWritten ReportsBoard Rule 10606
References
11
Case No. ADJ1186781 (VNO 0516635) ADJ1590743 (VNO 0552326)
Regular
Jun 10, 2013

DANA BONSALL vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured

Defendant County of Los Angeles petitioned to set aside an order compelling payment of $14,500 to lien claimant, The 4600 Group. The defendant argued the order was based on mistake, as they were unaware of prior payments made to Burbank Podiatry, which was part of the lien claim. Crucially, the assigned judge realized she was disqualified due to previously serving as defense counsel in this matter. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the prior order, and remanded the case to a new judge to determine if the settlement should be set aside.

WCABPetition to Set AsideStipulation and OrderLien ClaimantWCJ DisqualificationRule 9721.12(c)(2)Good CauseRescinded OrderRemandBurbank Podiatry
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 24,030 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