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. 13-ev-3288; 13-cv-4244
Regular Panel Decision

Alzheimer's Disease Resource Center, Inc. v. Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Ass'n

This case involves two related lawsuits stemming from the disaffiliation of the Alzheimer’s Disease Resource Center, Inc. (ADRC) from the Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association (the Association). In case 13-ev-3288, ADRC alleged unfair competition, false advertising, and other claims. The Court denied dismissal for false advertising under the Lanham Act, New York General Business Law § 349, and unjust enrichment, but granted dismissal for trademark infringement, common law unfair competition, UCC violations, conversion, tortious interference, and fraud. In case 13-cv-4244, ADRC alleged breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets related to donor lists. The Court granted the Association's motion to dismiss this complaint in its entirety. Punitive damages were stricken for Lanham Act and unjust enrichment claims.

Unfair CompetitionLanham ActFalse AdvertisingTrademark InfringementNew York General Business Law § 349Unjust EnrichmentMotion to DismissBreach of ContractTrade Secret MisappropriationConversion
References
55
Case No. ADJ6619965 ADJ9843987
Regular
Jul 16, 2018

JESUS ZARAGOZA vs. KOOL KOUNTRY, LLC, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Board granted reconsideration to review the finding of injury to the bladder, sleep disorder, sexual dysfunction, and cognitive disability/headaches, as well as the applicant's earnings. The Board affirmed the finding of injury to the bladder, sleep disorder, and sexual dysfunction but reversed the finding of injury related to cognitive impairment/headaches, finding insufficient medical evidence. Additionally, the Board amended the applicant's earnings to $270.00 per week, based on the parties' stipulation regarding the permanent disability rate, and affirmed the overall award except for these specific modifications.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings of FactAwardAdministrative Law JudgePermanent DisabilityAverage Weekly EarningsStipulationAgreed Medical ExaminerQualified Medical Examiner
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of John Z.

This case involves an appeal from an order recommitting the respondent to petitioner's custody due to a dangerous mental disorder. The respondent, with a history of multiple killings and a prior finding of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, had his parole revoked after exhibiting aggressive and threatening behavior upon conditional release. The Supreme Court determined he suffered from Antisocial Personality Disorder with narcissistic and paranoid features, which was deemed a dangerous mental disorder justifying civil confinement under CPL 330.20. The appellate court affirmed, rejecting the argument that the diagnosis was legally insufficient and upholding the finding of current dangerousness based on expert testimony, the respondent's history of violence, and his lack of insight into his condition.

dangerous mental disordercivil confinementantisocial personality disordernarcissistic featuresparanoid featuresCPL 330.20recommitmentmental illnessparole revocationexpert testimony
References
10
Case No. ADJ3962286 (LAO 0847943) ADJ2118358 (MON 0320906)
Regular
Oct 11, 2013

MARIANO DURAN vs. CBS OUTDOOR, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves two industrial injuries for the applicant, Mariano Duran, sustained in 2004. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) issued an award finding industrial injuries to the applicant's back, spine, shoulder, elbow, hypertension, heart disease, headaches, cognitive disorder, and sleep disorder, with a $91\%$ permanent disability rating after apportionment. Both applicant and defendant petitioned for reconsideration. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision after reconsideration, finding substantial evidence supported the award and declining to remand for further proceedings regarding the sleep disorder.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentCervical SpineLumbar SpineHypertensionHypertensive Heart DiseaseCognitive Disorder
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 01, 2000

La Fountaine v. Franzese

This personal injury action concerns a plaintiff (a minor) who suffered lead poisoning between April 1992 and September 1993 while living in an apartment owned and managed by the defendants. Routine medical examinations revealed elevated blood lead levels, prompting the Albany County Department of Health to order lead abatement procedures, which the defendants performed inadequately. Experts testified that the lead poisoning caused permanent disorders, including ADHD, cognitive, and reading disorders, which were not capable of practical apportionment between pre-notice and post-notice exposure periods. The jury awarded the plaintiff $500,000 for past pain and suffering, $1,000,000 for future pain and suffering, and $300,000 for future lost earnings, assigning 70% liability to the defendants. Defendants appealed the judgment and the denial of their motion to set aside the verdict, arguing lack of liability before notice, erroneous jury instructions, and excessive damages. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment and order, finding the defendants' arguments without merit and upholding the jury's findings on non-apportionment of injuries and the reasonableness of the damage awards.

Lead poisoningLandlord liabilityPersonal injury damagesNon-apportionment of injuriesADHDCognitive disordersEnvironmental lead hazardInadequate abatementExpert medical testimonyJury verdict review
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 1996

Claim of Palevsky v. New York City Board of Education

In 1986, while working as an education associate in the Bronx, the claimant sustained a fractured nose due to a student altercation and filed a timely workers' compensation claim, receiving benefits. The case remained open for a pending nasal surgery issue. Years later, in 1992, the claimant sought compensation for alleged consequential posttraumatic stress disorder. The self-insured employer, the New York City Board of Education, argued that Workers' Compensation Law § 28, a two-year statute of limitations, barred this new claim. However, both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board affirmed that Section 28 does not apply to consequential injuries. Upon appeal, the Court concurred, holding that a subsequent claim for disability compensation related to injuries in an earlier, timely claim is not barred by the two-year limit for amendment.

Workers' CompensationPosttraumatic Stress DisorderStatute of LimitationsConsequential InjuryWorkers' Compensation Law § 28Time BarBoard DecisionAppealWorkplace InjuryNasal Fracture
References
3
Case No. 10 Civ. 3314; 10 Civ. 5013
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2010

Alzheimer's Foundation of America, Inc. v. Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Ass'n

This consolidated opinion addresses dueling motions to dismiss in two civil actions involving the Alzheimer’s Foundation of Americas, Inc. (the "Foundation") and the Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association (the "Association"). The Foundation initiated a lawsuit alleging misrepresentation, trademark dilution, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, conspiracy, conversion, and UCC violations against the Association and Northern Trust. Conversely, the Association filed its own complaint asserting claims of trademark infringement, libel, injurious falsehood, false designation, dilution, fraud, tortious interference, injury to business reputation, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy against the Foundation and several individuals. The court denied motions to dismiss the Lanham Act, dilution, and unfair competition claims for both parties, but granted motions to dismiss the UCC, conversion, libel, unjust enrichment, and fraud claims, including all claims against Northern Trust. Leave to amend the complaints was granted.

Trademark InfringementUnfair CompetitionLanham ActDilutionUnjust EnrichmentConversionFraudCollateral EstoppelMotion to DismissRule 12(b)(6)
References
59
Case No. LAO 0785803
Regular
Nov 26, 2007

CARL BREWER, GLENDA BREWER vs. CAPITOL REPROGRAPHICS, CIGA for VILLANOVA INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding a prior award of permanent disability and attorney fees. The Board found that the opinion of Dr. Bertoldi, which concluded the applicant's severe cognitive disorder was primarily industrial and related to the head injury, constituted substantial evidence. The Board also dismissed the defendant's appeal regarding attorney fees, finding they were not aggrieved by an award paid from the applicant's benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSubstantial EvidenceInjured WorkerGuardian ad LitemDefendantPetition for ReconsiderationWCJPermanent DisabilityAttorneys Fees
References
2
Case No. ADJ4496653 (SJO 0211862) ADJ1988083
Regular
Nov 17, 2015

MICHAEL ROSILES vs. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

Both the applicant and the defendant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award finding the applicant 88% permanently disabled due to multiple industrial injuries. The applicant argued for 100% permanent disability, citing vocational expert testimony and preclusion from the open labor market under *LeBoeuf*. The defendant contested the rating, disputing findings of vertigo, sleep disorder, and cognitive disability. The Appeals Board denied both petitions, adopting the judge's report and affirming the 88% disability rating. A dissenting commissioner would have granted the applicant's petition for total permanent disability, emphasizing medical and vocational evidence of unemployability.

RosilesCounty of Santa ClaraPermanent DisabilityVocational ExpertLeBoeufVertigoNeuro-opthamologyGainful EmploymentTotal Permanent DisabilityLabor Market Preclusion
References
1
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 04342 [151 AD3d 1154]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2017

Claim of Pereira-Jersey v. Rockland Community College

Renee Pereira-Jersey, a purchasing agent, filed for workers' compensation benefits in February 2008 due to conditions like breathing difficulties and headaches resulting from workplace mold exposure. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established a work-related injury, later amending the claim to include a consequential cognitive adjustment disorder and awarding reduced earnings for a three-day work week, which was affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The employer, Rockland Community College, repeatedly challenged further reduced earnings awards. However, the WCLJ and Board found substantial evidence supporting claimant's causally-related disability preventing full-time work. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to its resolution of conflicting medical evidence and finding no abuse of discretion in the Board not considering an issue not raised before the WCLJ.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsMold Exposure InjuryReduced EarningsCognitive ImpairmentOccupational AsthmaChronic SinusitisToxic EncephalopathyAppellate DivisionSubstantial EvidenceConflicting Medical Opinions
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 434 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