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. 2023 NY Slip Op 02365 [215 AD3d 140]
Regular Panel Decision
May 04, 2023

Matter of Oceanview Home for Adults, Inc. v. Zucker

The case involves an appeal by Howard Zucker, Commissioner of Health, challenging a Supreme Court judgment that invalidated state regulations imposing an admissions cap on individuals with serious mental illness in transitional adult homes. Oceanview Home for Adults, Inc. argued that these regulations violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the lower court's decision, asserting that the regulations, although facially discriminatory, were designed to benefit the protected class by implementing the integration mandate of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as interpreted in Olmstead v L.C. The court concluded that the regulations were narrowly tailored to achieve the beneficial purpose of promoting community-based integration for individuals with serious mental illness.

Fair Housing Act (FHA)Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)Olmstead v L.C.Integration MandateMental IllnessAdult HomesTransitional Adult HomesAdmissions CapState RegulationsAppellate Review
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

K.D. ex rel. Duncan v. White Plains School District

Plaintiffs K.D. (a developmentally disabled adult) and her mother Kerry Kelly Duncan sued the White Plains School District (WPSD) and several individual defendants. The claims stemmed from an incident where K.D. was interviewed by police at school, without parental consent, after reporting an alleged assault by her brother. Plaintiffs alleged violations of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, conspiracy, supervisory liability, gross negligence, and intentional/negligent infliction of emotional distress. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss all federal claims, including § 1983 and § 1985 conspiracy claims, Fourth Amendment claims (due to qualified immunity and lack of clearly established rights for in-school interviews of adults), and procedural/substantive due process claims (as K.D. was an adult and the interview did not constitute a deprivation of custody or conscience-shocking conduct). Remaining state law claims were dismissed without prejudice due to the absence of federal claims.

Fourth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessQualified ImmunityMotion to DismissSchool InterviewChild Abuse InvestigationSection 1983Section 1985Conspiracy
References
97
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gooshaw v. Wing

A disabled adult, relying on SSI and workers' compensation, relocated his mobile home to an undeveloped plot in Cortland County after eviction, lacking essential utilities. Faced with building code violations, he sought emergency assistance from the Cortland County Department of Social Services (DSS) for property improvements. DSS denied his application, recommending alternative housing, a decision affirmed by the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, which reasoned that his needs were foreseeable and not a sudden catastrophe. The court upheld this denial, confirming that the requested capital improvements fell outside the scope of emergency assistance for adults (EAA), which is intended for unforeseen events. It was concluded that the application was correctly assessed under emergency safety net assistance, which permits considering cost-effective alternatives, and the determination was supported by substantial evidence.

Emergency AssistanceDisabled AdultSupplemental Security IncomeWorkers' Compensation BenefitsMobile HomeBuilding Code ViolationsCapital ImprovementsSocial Services LawForeseeabilityCatastrophic Emergency
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Juvenile Male

The United States Government moved to transfer a juvenile male defendant, charged with four brutal, premeditated murders connected to the MS-13 street gang, to adult status for prosecution. Judge Joseph F. Bianco of the Eastern District of New York evaluated six statutory factors, including the defendant's age (nearly 18 at the time of the offense and 19 at the hearing), his supportive social background despite gang affiliation, and a lack of prior delinquency record. While some factors weighed against transfer, the severe nature of the alleged crimes and the low likelihood of rehabilitation within the juvenile justice system were found to overwhelmingly favor adult prosecution. The Court ultimately granted the government's motion, emphasizing public protection over the juvenile's rehabilitation potential given the gravity of the offenses.

juvenile justiceadult prosecutionMS-13gang violencemurderracketeeringtransfer motionrehabilitation potentialjudicial discretionstatutory factors
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 26, 1995

Vasarhelyi v. New School for Social Research

Plaintiff Marina Vasarhelyi, former Controller and Treasurer of The New School for Social Research, questioned President Jonathan Fanton's financial practices and hiring decisions. In response, Fanton initiated an investigation into a leaked confidential memorandum, singling out Vasarhelyi for hostile interrogation by criminal attorneys. When she requested a witness for further questioning, Fanton suspended and subsequently terminated her employment. Vasarhelyi sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and prima facie tort. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the complaint, but the appellate court modified the judgment, reinstating the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, while affirming the dismissal of the defamation and prima facie tort claims.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional DistressDefamationPrima Facie TortEmployer RetaliationWrongful TerminationAbuse of PowerHostile Work EnvironmentEmployee InterrogationAppellate ReviewJudgment Modification
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Goding v. Par Microsystems

This case involves a claimant's appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied benefits for a respiratory condition. The claimant alleged the condition was an occupational disease caused by workplace irritants. The Board's decision, which found no causal relationship between the condition and employment, was based on the opinion of a pulmonologist. This expert concluded that the claimant's respiratory distress was related to obesity, not occupational asthma or multiple chemical sensitivities. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that the Board has the discretion to resolve conflicts in medical opinions, particularly when determining causality.

Occupational DiseaseRespiratory ConditionCausationMedical Opinion ConflictWorkers' Compensation BenefitsIndependent Medical ExaminationBoard DiscretionAsthmaMultiple Chemical SensitivitiesObesity
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mantis v. United Cerebral Palsy Association of Nassau County, Inc.

Stephanie Mantis, a quadriplegic adult with cerebral palsy, reported abuse by her mother, Elizabeth Mantis, to the United Cerebral Palsy Association of Nassau County, Inc. (UCP). UCP followed mandated procedures, reporting the allegations to the New York State Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities (OMRDD) and Adult Protective Services (APS), and provided temporary lodging for Stephanie. Despite Stephanie later recanting her initial statement, OMRDD found UCP acted in her best interest. Elizabeth Mantis subsequently filed a lawsuit against UCP, asserting claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and false imprisonment. The court granted UCP's motion for partial summary judgment, finding that UCP was immune from civil liability under Social Services Law § 473-b due to its good faith reporting of the suspected abuse. Furthermore, the court denied the plaintiffs' cross-motion for a stay of decision pending depositions and imposed sanctions on Elizabeth Mantis and her attorneys for continuing the claims in bad faith.

Abuse AllegationsSocial Services LawImmunity from Civil LiabilityPartial Summary JudgmentIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressDefamation ClaimFalse Imprisonment ClaimAdult Protective ServicesOMRDD InvestigationSanctions for Bad Faith Litigation
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 18, 1988

Brophy v. County of Putnam

The plaintiff, a former Putnam County Deputy Sheriff, sought damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, alleging the county opposed his efforts to obtain workers' compensation benefits and wrongfully terminated his employment. His motion for partial summary judgment, based on General Municipal Law § 207-c, was denied by the Supreme Court due to an unjustified five-year delay in asserting the statutory claim, which would prejudice the county. The Supreme Court's decision to deny the motion was affirmed on appeal, finding no merit in the plaintiff's argument against the "theory-of-pleadings doctrine" and emphasizing the lengthy and unexplained delay in asserting the claim after the law's amendment.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional DistressPartial Summary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation BenefitsDisability PensionEmployment TerminationProcedural DelayStatutory ClaimAppellate ReviewAffirmationGeneral Municipal Law
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Smith v. Shady Lawn Home for Adults

Claimant, a licensed practical nurse, sustained a herniated disc on May 6, 1974, while working at Shady Lawn Home for Adults. She reported the injury and filed a claim for compensation. The referee found a compensable injury and employer notice, which the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed, also upholding the right to make continuing awards. Appellants challenged the medical evidence and the Board's jurisdiction on appeal. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s decisions, finding substantial evidence for causal relation and confirming the Board's authority to grant awards, while deeming the notice issue unpreserved for review.

Workers' CompensationHerniated DiscCausal RelationshipNotice of InjuryAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceContinuing AwardsBoard JurisdictionEmployer LiabilityMedical Testimony
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 03, 2002

Edwards v. Mercy Home for Children & Adults, Inc.

A nurse sustained personal injuries after being attacked by a patient, Kelvin Davis, a resident of Mercy Home for Children and Adults, Inc., while attempting a medical procedure at St. Joseph’s Hospital. Davis, diagnosed with profound retardation and aggression, was at the hospital for treatment of violent outbursts. Mercy Home and Davis moved for summary judgment, arguing a lack of duty of care. The Supreme Court denied their motion. On appeal, the order was modified: summary judgment was granted to Mercy Home, dismissing claims against it, as no special relationship imposing a duty of care to the plaintiff was found. However, Davis's motion for summary judgment was denied due to insufficient evidence presented on his behalf.

Personal InjuryNegligenceSummary JudgmentDuty of CareSpecial RelationshipMentally-Retarded PatientHospital LiabilityEmployer LiabilityThird-Party ConductAppellate Decision
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 701 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