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

In re Jessica C.

This opinion addresses child abuse petitions filed by the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York against Gina C., a babysitter, concerning injuries to Travis S. and potential derivative neglect of Gina C.'s own child, Jessica C. The court examines whether a babysitter, whose services were performed outside the children's home and who is no longer employed, qualifies as a "person legally responsible" under Family Court Act article 10. Judge Guy P. De Phillips concludes that Gina C. is not a properly named respondent. Additionally, the court determines that a derivative finding of neglect for Jessica C. is not justified solely based on a single injury to Travis S., absent independent evidence of neglect. Consequently, both petitions against Gina C. are dismissed, emphasizing the limited jurisdiction of the Family Court and the specific interpretation of "person legally responsible" in the context of family-like relationships.

Child abuseChild neglectBabysitter liabilityFamily Court Act Article 10Legal responsibilityIn loco parentisJurisdictional limitsDerivative neglectStatutory interpretationParental responsibility

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. Lavine

In this Article 78 proceeding, the petitioner sought to vacate the determination of respondents denying her application for payment of certain babysitting expenses. The petitioner, a recipient of public assistance, incurred these expenses to attend her brother's funeral in an emergency situation. She attempted to secure prior approval from the Social Services Office but was unable to reach her caseworker or supervisor. Upon her return, her request for payment was denied on the procedural ground of failing to obtain prior approval. The court found this determination to be arbitrary and capricious given the emergency circumstances and the department's lack of a procedure for such situations. The court vacated the determination and remitted the matter for consideration on the merits.

babysitting expensespublic assistanceemergency servicesprior approvalsocial services regulationsarbitrary and capriciousfair hearingOnondaga Countytemporary absenceprocedural grounds

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 11, 1992

Claim of Simmons v. Moss

Claimant, a babysitter employed by James and Sara Moss, sustained an injury when a defective window fell on her head. The employers had a homeowner's insurance policy with Metropolitan Property Liability Insurance Company, which included a workers' compensation endorsement (H917) for employees working less than 40 hours per week. As the claimant worked 50 hours per week, the Workers’ Compensation Board concluded that she was not covered under this policy. The Board also rejected arguments for coverage based on equitable estoppel or reformation due to mutual mistake of fact. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationHomeowner's PolicyInsurance CoverageEmployee ClassificationH917 EndorsementRegular EmploymentPolicy InterpretationEquitable EstoppelMutual Mistake of FactBoard Decision

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

In re Jamie Lynn S.

This is an appeal from a child protective proceeding under Article 10 of the Family Court Act, where the respondent father was accused of sexually abusing his 3.5-year-old daughter and neglecting his 5-year-old daughter. The Family Court initially dismissed the petition, but the appellate court found compelling evidence to support the allegations. Evidence included the younger child's disclosures to a babysitter and mother, observed vaginal irritation, a pediatrician's testimony confirming an injury consistent with object insertion, and corroborating interviews by a therapist and social worker. The appellate court reversed the Family Court's decision, granted the petition, and remitted the matter for a dispositional hearing, concluding that the preponderance of credible evidence supported the petition.

Child Protective ProceedingSexual AbuseChild NeglectFamily Court Act Article 10Credibility of WitnessesPreponderance of EvidenceVaginal InjuryPediatric ExaminationOut-of-Court StatementsCorroborated Testimony

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Dietz v. Damas

In this case, James Dietz and his parents sued the City of New York, its agents, and a babysitter following infant James's blinding due to Whiplash Shaken Infant Syndrome in December 1988. The plaintiffs alleged constitutional violations, including due process infringement, inadequate investigation by the Child Welfare Administration (CWA), and retaliatory prosecution after CWA restricted parental custody and filed an abuse petition. The court granted summary judgment to the City defendants, ruling that CWA's emergency intervention was objectively reasonable, the delay in an adversarial hearing was constitutionally permissible, and the investigation was adequate. It also found probable cause for the family court petition and no actual chilling of First Amendment rights. The court dismissed all supplemental state law claims due to lack of federal jurisdiction.

Child AbuseWhiplash Shaken Infant SyndromeParental RightsDue ProcessQualified ImmunityRetaliatory ProsecutionFamily Court ProceedingsCustody DisputeSocial Services LawMedical Diagnosis

References

Showing 1-5 of 5 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

In re Jessica C.

Child abuseChild neglectBabysitter liabilityFamily Court Act Article 10Legal responsibilityIn loco parentisJurisdictional limitsDerivative neglectStatutory interpretationParental responsibility

Davis v. Lavine

babysitting expensespublic assistanceemergency servicesprior approvalsocial services regulationsarbitrary and capriciousfair hearingOnondaga Countytemporary absenceprocedural grounds

Claim of Simmons v. Moss

Workers' CompensationHomeowner's PolicyInsurance CoverageEmployee ClassificationH917 EndorsementRegular EmploymentPolicy InterpretationEquitable EstoppelMutual Mistake of FactBoard Decision

In re Jamie Lynn S.

Dietz v. Damas

Child AbuseWhiplash Shaken Infant SyndromeParental RightsDue ProcessQualified ImmunityRetaliatory ProsecutionFamily Court ProceedingsCustody DisputeSocial Services LawMedical Diagnosis