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 Andrews v. Pinkerton Security

Claimant, a security guard, injured his left knee at work. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge awarded benefits, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, concluding the injury, though occurring in the course of employment, did not arise out of it. This court reversed the Board's determination, emphasizing the statutory presumption under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 [1] that an an injury occurring in the course of employment also arises out of it. The court found the Board failed to provide substantial medical evidence to rebut this presumption, despite a mention of a prior injury. The matter was remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with the court's decision.

Workers' CompensationCompensable InjuryCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentStatutory PresumptionRebuttal EvidenceMedical EvidenceAppellate ReviewRemittalLeft Knee Injury
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Boni-Phillips v. Oliver

The case involves an appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Board's decision to award death benefits to a claimant whose husband died from cardiac arrest at work. The Board initially found a presumption of compensability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1) due to the unwitnessed death. However, the employer presented substantial evidence of the decedent's preexisting heart conditions, including high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and coronary artery disease, which a medical expert opined were the cause of death. This evidence rebutted the presumption, shifting the burden to the claimant to prove a causal relationship. The court reversed the Board's decision, which incorrectly relied on the presumption, and remitted the matter for a determination on whether the claimant could establish that work activities contributed to the heart attack.

Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsCausal RelationshipPresumption of CompensabilityUnwitnessed DeathPreexisting ConditionCoronary Artery DiseaseMedical Expert TestimonyBurden of ProofAppellate ReviewRemand to Board
References
6
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 27428
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Bd. v. Compensation Risk Mgrs., LLC

This action was brought by the New York State Workers' Compensation Board (WCB), as an assignee of former members of the Healthcare Industry Trust of New York (HITNY), against Compensation Risk Managers, LLC (CRM), HITNY trustees, and auditing firm UHY LLP. The WCB alleged mismanagement, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent auditing, leading to the Trust's insolvency. Defendants moved to dismiss on grounds of standing, statute of limitations, and pleading particularity. The court dismissed certain derivative claims and negligent misrepresentation claims against some trustees due to standing issues and statute of limitations. All claims against UHY LLP were dismissed for lack of a near-privity relationship or prior precedent. An implied indemnity claim against the trustees was sustained. The WCB's cross-motion to consolidate related actions was denied.

Workers' Compensation LawGroup Self-Insured Trust (GSIT)Fiduciary DutyNegligenceNegligent MisrepresentationStatute of LimitationsStandingDerivative ActionImplied IndemnityAuditing Firm Liability
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Estate of Moody v. Quality Structures, Inc.

Decedent, a laborer, collapsed and died on his first day of work at a construction site while pouring and raking concrete. His estate applied for workers' compensation death benefits for his children. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the claim, invoking the presumption of compensability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1), as the employer failed to rebut it with substantial evidence. An independent medical report by cardiologist Stephen Nash attributed death to cardiac arrhythmia and enlarged heart, with lack of sleep as a contributory factor, but did not rule out work involvement. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding the cause of the fatal arrhythmia unexplained and the employer's evidence insufficient to overcome the presumption.

Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsCausally Related EmploymentPresumption of CompensabilityCardiac ArrhythmiaEnlarged HeartIndependent Medical ReportConstruction Laborer DeathUnexplained CollapseRebuttal of PresumptionSubstantial Evidence
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Fedor-Leo v. Broome County Sheriff's Department

Claimant, a correction officer, sought workers’ compensation benefits for a right shoulder injury allegedly sustained in an unwitnessed accident. She testified to slipping on stairs and reported the incident, receiving medical treatment. The employer disputed the claim, presenting evidence that claimant had been disciplined shortly before and that her ‘tip alarm’ was not triggered. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially applied the Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 presumption of compensability. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, finding the employer had presented substantial evidence to rebut the presumption, and disallowed the claim. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s decision, clarifying that the § 21 presumption establishes an accident arose out of employment but not that an accident occurred, which remains a factual question. Substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that no accident occurred.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjuryUnwitnessed AccidentPresumption of CompensabilitySufficiency of EvidenceFactual QuestionShoulder InjuryCorrection OfficerBoard DeterminationSubstantial Evidence
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Brown v. New York City Department of Correction

Claimant appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying benefits for cardiomyopathy. The claimant argued that work-related stress caused hypertension, leading to his cardiac condition, and that the manifestation of his condition at work created a presumption of work-relatedness under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1). However, this issue was not raised before the Board and thus unpreserved for review. The court noted that the presumption applies to unwitnessed or unexplained accidents, which was not the case here. An impartial cardiologist found no causal link between the claimant's work and his cardiac distress, an opinion the Board credited over contrary medical evidence. The decision of the Workers' Compensation Board was affirmed.

Workers' CompensationCardiomyopathyHypertensionWork-Related StressCausal LinkMedical EvidenceImpartial Medical ExaminationPresumptionUnpreserved IssueAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 1999

Claim of the Estate of Hertz v. Gannett Rochester Newspapers

The decedent, a newspaper delivery person, suffered a fatal heart attack during the course of his employment. His estate filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, which was denied by the Workers’ Compensation Board on the grounds that the death was not causally related to his employment. The claimant appealed, arguing that the Board erred in requiring medical causation despite the presumption of compensability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1). The court affirmed the Board’s decision, stating that the presumption did not relieve the claimant from establishing that the death arose out of and in the course of employment. The Board properly weighed conflicting expert evidence, crediting the employer's expert who concluded the death was due to coronary thrombosis unrelated to work, thereby providing substantial evidence to rebut the presumption.

Heart AttackWorkers’ CompensationCausationPresumption of CompensabilityExpert TestimonyConflicting EvidenceCoronary ThrombosisAtherosclerotic ChangeNewspaper Delivery PersonBoard Decision
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Barrington v. Hudson Valley Fruit Juice, Inc.

The claimant's decedent, a factory laborer, suffered an unwitnessed intracerebral hemorrhage at work and subsequently died. The employer controverted the claim for workers’ compensation death benefits. A WCLJ initially closed the case for lack of prima facie medical evidence, but a subsequent WCLJ reopened and found sufficient medical evidence based on the presumption of compensability in Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1). The Workers’ Compensation Board then rescinded this decision, ruling that claimant's medical reports did not constitute prima facie evidence of a causal relationship. On appeal, the Court found that the Board erred in requiring prima facie medical evidence in this unwitnessed death case, compelling the application of Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1) presumption. The Court also noted that the employer had not presented evidence to rebut this presumption. The decision of the Board was reversed, and the matter was remitted for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationIntracerebral HemorrhageUnwitnessed DeathPresumption of CompensabilityCausal RelationshipPrima Facie Medical EvidenceBoard ErrorReversalRemittalDeath Benefits Claim
References
11
Case No. No. 46
Regular Panel Decision
May 16, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Justin Timperio

This case clarifies the operation of the rebuttable presumption set forth in Workers' Compensation Law § 21 (1). Justin Timperio, a first-year resident at Bronx-Lebanon Hospital, was severely injured during a mass shooting by a former employee with whom he had no prior contact. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board initially found the injuries compensable, the Appellate Division reversed, arguing that the lack of evidence regarding the assailant's motivation rebutted the WCL § 21 (1) presumption. The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division's decision, holding that a lack of evidence regarding the motivation for an assault does not rebut the presumption that an injury arising in the course of employment also arises out of employment. The Workers' Compensation Board's decision was therefore reinstated.

Workplace AssaultRebuttable PresumptionCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentWCL Section 21(1)Lack of EvidenceMotivation for AssaultAppellate Division ReversalCourt of Appeals DecisionMedical Staff Injury
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 04, 2006

Claim of Johnson v. County of Clinton

Claimant filed for workers' compensation death benefits after her husband died at work. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge denied the claim, finding that the presumption of compensability had been rebutted. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the denial of benefits, ruling that the decedent’s death was not causally related to his employment. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, noting that the presumption of compensability was inapplicable as the death was witnessed and explained by autopsy, and deferred to the Board's resolution of conflicting medical expert opinions.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsCausationPresumption of CompensabilityMedical Expert TestimonyAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionAutopsyConflicting Opinions
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 21,143 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