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

Claim of Arena v. Crown Asphalt Co.

Thomas Arena (decedent) sustained a work-related foot injury in 1980, leading to workers' compensation benefits and subsequent renal failure. Decedent and his wife (claimant) filed a third-party medical malpractice action against treating physicians and the hospital, which was settled in 1988 through a structured settlement. A stipulation between the carrier and decedent outlined the carrier's offset credit against decedent's workers' compensation claim and reserved rights against future death benefits claims, but claimant was not a signatory. After decedent's death in 1993, claimant filed for death benefits, prompting the carrier to seek an offset credit from the third-party settlement proceeds. The Workers’ Compensation Board initially found the carrier entitled to a credit, but later reversed itself, ruling against any credit. The appeals court determined that the carrier sufficiently preserved its offset rights through a general release signed by both claimant and decedent. However, it found no clear agreement on the specific offset amount in the stipulation or settlement that applied to claimant's death benefits. Consequently, the Board's decision of zero credit was reversed, and the matter was remitted for a factual determination of the precise credit amount.

Offset CreditThird-Party SettlementDeath Benefits ClaimRenal FailureMedical MalpracticeStipulation AgreementGeneral ReleaseWaiver of RightsStructured SettlementApportionment of Damages
References
12
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 01469
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 28, 2019

Guthorn v. Village of Saranac Lake

In this appeal, Robert Guthorn, an injured project manager, and his wife sued the Village of Saranac Lake alleging Labor Law violations. The Village, acting as a third-party plaintiff, sought contractual indemnification from Kilby & Gannon Construction Services, LLC, Guthorn's employer and a subcontractor. The core legal dispute revolved around the retroactive enforceability of an indemnification clause within a subcontractor agreement (AIA agreement) that was executed by Kilby & Gannon after Guthorn's accident but was backdated to an earlier date. Supreme Court denied the Village's cross-motion for summary judgment, citing a question of fact regarding whether the parties intended the agreement to apply retroactively. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed this decision, concluding that material issues of fact precluded summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim.

Contractual IndemnificationRetroactive AgreementSummary JudgmentLabor Law ViolationsSubcontractor AgreementThird-Party ActionConstruction AccidentAppellate ReviewQuestion of FactIndemnification Clause
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 1982

Claim of Moore v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority

This case involves an appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning a carrier's conduct regarding a claimant's third-party action settlement. The core issue was whether the board's finding that the carrier was estopped from raising lack of consent to the settlement as a defense for future compensation awards was supported by substantial evidence. The record showed that the claimant's attorney sought the carrier's consent multiple times but was advised it was unnecessary. The board concluded that the carrier's prior denials of the necessity for consent legally prevented them from later asserting its absence as a defense. The appellate court affirmed the board's decision.

Workers' CompensationEstoppelThird-Party ActionSettlement ConsentCarrier ConductFuture AwardsSubstantial EvidenceAppellate DivisionClaimant RightsDefense Waiver
References
1
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 05047
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2024

Cooper v. Bldg 7th St. LLC

This case involves an appeal regarding summary judgment motions on indemnification and breach of contract claims between defendants/third-party plaintiffs BLDG 7th Street, LLC et al. and third-party defendant Global Pest Control, LLC. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order by denying summary judgment to Global on BLDG's contractual indemnification claim, citing an unclear and ambiguous indemnification agreement. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of BLDG's common-law indemnification and contribution claims against Global because plaintiff Dwayne Cooper was not alleged to have sustained a grave injury under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. The dismissal of BLDG's breach of contract claim for failure to procure insurance was also affirmed, as Global provided proof of its policy meeting contractual requirements. Consequently, issues of fact remain concerning the scope of the parties' indemnification agreement.

Contractual IndemnificationCommon-Law IndemnificationSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractFailure to Procure InsuranceThird-Party ClaimsWorkers' Compensation Law § 11Grave InjuryAmbiguity in ContractAppellate Review
References
9
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04809 [140 AD3d 532]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2016

Masi v. Cassone Trailer & Container Co.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, which denied motions for summary judgment by defendant Cassone Leasing Inc. and third-party defendant LKQ Hunts Point Auto Parts Corp. The case involved Anthony Masi's personal injury claims against various defendants, including Cassone Trailer & Container Co. and Cassone Leasing Inc. The court clarified that a prior settlement agreement under Workers' Compensation Law § 32, entered into by Masi and his employer LKQ, only settled workers' compensation claims and did not release personal injury claims against other defendants. Furthermore, a subsequent broad release agreement between Masi and LKQ released claims solely in favor of LKQ, not extending to other defendants in the personal injury suit. The court did not address whether the release barred third-party actions against LKQ, as that issue was not raised below.

Summary judgmentPersonal injury claimsWorkers' Compensation LawSettlement agreementRelease agreementThird-party actionsAppellate reviewDismissal motionScope of releaseEmployer liability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 19, 2002

Claim of Estate of Lutz v. Lakeside Beikirk Nursing Home

The case involves an appeal by a claimant from two Workers' Compensation Board decisions concerning a waiver agreement. The decedent, Beverly Lutz, her employer, and carrier had a proposed settlement agreement that was filed but not yet approved when she died. The Board, through Commissioner Tremiti, refused to honor the agreement after the carrier and Special Funds withdrew their consent. Although an approval notice was mistakenly issued, the Board later corrected it, ruling the agreement was never approved. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the Board had continuing jurisdiction to correct its error and that the withdrawal of consent by the carrier and Special Funds justified the disapproval of the agreement.

Workers' CompensationSettlement AgreementWaiver AgreementDeath BenefitsBoard ReviewJurisdictionConsent WithdrawalStatutory InterpretationRegulation ValidityAppellate Review
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 15, 2006

In Re Delta Air Lines, Inc.

Comair, a regional airline and subsidiary of Delta Air Lines, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This decision concerns Comair's motion to reject its collective bargaining agreement with the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) under Section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code. Comair argued that its pilot costs were uncompetitive compared to other regional carriers, leading to a significant loss of market share and fleet reduction. Despite ALPA's objections regarding Comair's profitability and lack of job security commitments, the court found Comair's proposed modifications to the agreement necessary for its long-term viability and that all affected parties should share the burden of reorganization. The motion was granted, allowing Comair to reject the Pilot Agreement and implement a lower cost structure.

BankruptcyCollective Bargaining AgreementSection 1113Airline IndustryLabor CostsReorganizationPilot AgreementFinancial RestructuringCompetitive DisadvantageUnion Negotiations
References
19
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 03642
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 10, 2021

Lorica v. Krug

Plaintiff Joseph Lorica, an employee of third-party defendant G & C Plumbing & Heating Corp., was injured in a fall at a construction site owned by defendant Jeremy Krug and managed by defendant The Krug Group Corp. Lorica and his spouse derivatively commenced an action against Krug and The Krug Group Corp., alleging Labor Law violations. The defendants then filed a third-party action against G & C seeking contractual and common-law indemnification. The Supreme Court dismissed the common-law indemnification claim but partially denied G & C's motion for summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim, finding questions of fact. G & C appealed. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that G & C failed to meet its initial burden on summary judgment due to unresolved questions of fact regarding whether the parties had an indemnification agreement prior to the accident and whether a written agreement signed after the accident was intended to apply retroactively.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentRetroactive AgreementWorkers' Compensation Law § 11Labor Law § 240Construction Site InjuryThird-Party ClaimAppellate ReviewHold Harmless AgreementQuestions of Fact
References
11
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 07354 [200 AD3d 1578]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2021

Corter-Longwell v. Juliano

This case concerns an appeal regarding a third-party action for indemnification in a wrongful death lawsuit. Michalla Corter-Longwell, as administratrix of James L. Corter's estate, initiated the original action. Pocono Logistic, Inc. (third-party plaintiff) sued Seneca Meadows, Inc. (third-party defendant) for common-law indemnification. Seneca counterclaimed for contractual indemnification, alleging Pocono breached an agreement by failing to procure insurance naming Seneca as an additional insured. The Supreme Court denied Seneca's motion for summary judgment and granted Pocono's cross-motion, dismissing Seneca's counterclaims. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, found the agreement ambiguous regarding Pocono's obligation to name Seneca as an additional insured. Therefore, it modified the order by denying Pocono's cross-motion and reinstating Seneca's counterclaims, while affirming the denial of Seneca's summary judgment motion.

Contractual IndemnificationInsurance ProcurementAdditional InsuredSummary JudgmentThird-Party BeneficiaryContract InterpretationAmbiguityWrongful DeathBreach of ContractAppellate Review
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Beth V. v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services

Claimant, a youth division aide, suffered severe injuries including physical assault, rape, and kidnapping during work, leading to established workers' compensation benefits and a classification of permanent partial disability. She subsequently reached a $650,000 settlement in a federal civil rights action against her employer and co-employees for the same injuries. The workers' compensation carrier waived its lien for past benefits but asserted a right to a credit for future payments against the settlement under Workers’ Compensation Law § 29. The Workers’ Compensation Board reversed a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge’s decision, ruling in favor of the carrier's credit, finding the settlement covered the same injuries for which workers' compensation benefits were awarded. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, confirming the carrier's entitlement to a credit against the third-party settlement recovery.

Workers' CompensationThird-Party SettlementCredit Against RecoveryLienFuture BenefitsPermanent Partial DisabilityPTSDRapeCivil Rights ClaimFederal Lawsuit
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 7,394 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