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 Umanzor v. General Telecom

This case involves an appeal from decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning death benefits following a decedent's death in the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks. The decedent's mother (claimant) sought workers’ compensation death benefits for herself and the decedent's minor half-siblings, asserting financial dependency. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found dependency and awarded benefits, but the Board reversed this finding, concluding that the record did not support the claim of dependency under Workers’ Compensation Law § 16 (4-a), while still awarding some benefits under § 16 (4-b). The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing numerous discrepancies and inconsistencies in the claimant's evidence regarding household expenses and the decedent's financial contributions, which made it impossible to determine if the loss had a detrimental effect, thus upholding the Board's finding of no dependency under § 16 (4-a).

Workers’ CompensationDeath BenefitsDependencyWorld Trade Center Attack9/11Financial ContributionSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewHousehold ExpensesFactual Finding
References
6
Case No. ADJ9440770 ADJ8897603
Regular
Nov 02, 2016

LEE WOOLEVER (Deceased); PENNY WOOLEVER; DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DEATH WITHOUT DEPENDENTS UNIT vs. CITY OF LONG BEACH

This case concerns a claim for workers' compensation death benefits by Penny Woolever, the ex-wife of deceased employee Lee Woolever. Ms. Woolever argued she was a total dependent despite their divorce due to ongoing financial support and a close relationship. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the finding that she was not a dependent, as their divorce was final and they never resumed cohabitation. The Board distinguished this case from precedent allowing dependency claims based on reconciliation. Consequently, the death benefit was awarded to the Department of Industrial Relations, Death Without Dependents Unit.

Esophageal cancerDeath benefitsDependency claimLabor Code section 3502Reconciliation of marriageSpousal supportTotal dependentDivorce decreeWCJ ReportLloyd Corporation
References
5
Case No. ADJ3872772 (VNO 0546594) ADJ310152 (MON 0351415)
Regular
Nov 05, 2015

HIRAN EDIRIWEERA (Deceased); DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DEATH WITHOUT DEPENDENTS UNIT vs. SRR, LLC; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Petitioners, alleged partial dependents of a deceased worker, sought to overturn a 2007 Compromise and Release agreement where the insurer paid death benefits to the State's Death Without Dependents Unit, asserting they received no notice. The Board dismissed their petition for reconsideration of the 2007 order due to untimeliness and failure to meet reopening criteria. However, the Board removed the separate, pending death benefit claim (ADJ3872772) to address the petitioners' potential claims for partial dependency, acknowledging prior notification of their existence to the insurer.

Partial dependentsDeath benefitsCompromise and Release AgreementPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseReopeningTimelinessNoticeOpportunity to objectIndustrial injury
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 14, 1982

Claim of Rodriguez v. Vogue Metalcraft, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that awarded death benefits to the parents of a deceased employee. The employee died in a factory explosion. While the employer and carrier conceded compensability, they contested the parents' claim of dependency. The Board found the parents were partially dependent, based on evidence of the decedent's financial contributions to household expenses. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that it was supported by substantial evidence, thereby upholding the award of death benefits.

Death BenefitsDependency ClaimFactory AccidentWorkers' Compensation AppealPartial DependencySubstantial Evidence ReviewHousehold ContributionsAppellate DivisionEmployer LiabilityInsurance Carrier Responsibility
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Racha v. Vernon Racha/Vern's Truck & Diesel Service

The Workers' Compensation Board initially denied a claim for death benefits to a posthumous out-of-wedlock child, arguing a lack of dependency evidence. The appellate court reversed this decision, asserting that while acknowledgment is no longer a statutory requirement for out-of-wedlock children, evidence of a deceased parent's acknowledgment is crucial for establishing dependency, especially when the child is born after the parent's death. The court found that the undisputed testimony of the decedent acknowledging the unborn child, coupled with his plans to marry the mother and provide housing, created a presumption of dependency. This presumption was further buttressed by the mother's subsequent inability to care for the child. The case was remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with this court’s decision.

DependencyPosthumous ChildOut-of-wedlock childPaternityWorkers' Compensation LawIndustrial AccidentDeath BenefitsAcknowledgmentPresumption of DependencyReversal
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 1984

Krebbeks v. Regan

Petitioner, the widow of a Department of Transportation employee, applied for accidental death benefits after her husband's service-connected death in July 1981. Although her application for accidental death benefits was approved, these benefits were entirely offset by workers' compensation payments, leaving her with no current payments from the State Employees’ Retirement System. Subsequently, petitioner sought a lump-sum ordinary death benefit, which was denied because she was deemed eligible for accidental death benefits, even if offset. This appeal ensued after the denial of her application by a hearing officer and Special Term's concurrence. The court affirmed the denial, citing Retirement and Social Security Law § 60 (a) (3), which states an ordinary death benefit is not payable if an accidental death benefit is payable, with a narrow exception not applicable here.

Accidental Death BenefitsOrdinary Death BenefitsWorkers' Compensation OffsetRetirement and Social Security LawStatutory InterpretationDeath Benefits EligibilityPublic Employee BenefitsAdministrative Law AppealDeath Benefit Offset
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Smolicz v. Fitzgerald

Decedent, Frank Koestner, died in the September 11, 2001 attacks while working at the World Trade Center. His former wife, the claimant, filed for workers' compensation death benefits for their daughter, which were initially awarded. Michelle Stabile subsequently claimed entitlement to a portion of these benefits as the decedent's domestic partner, a claim initially denied by a workers' compensation law judge but reversed by the Workers’ Compensation Board, which awarded Stabile benefits. The claimant appealed this decision, arguing that Stabile did not meet the statutory definition of a domestic partner, specifically lacking dependence on the decedent for support. The court found insufficient evidence to establish Stabile's dependence or mutual interdependence with the decedent, despite their engagement and plans to marry. Consequently, the court reversed the Board's decision and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Death benefitsDomestic partnershipWorkers' Compensation LawDependency for supportStatutory interpretationAppellate reviewFactual questionSubstantial evidenceRemandSeptember 11, 2001 attacks
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2003

Beesmer v. Village of DeRuyter Fire Department

In 1975, the decedent, a volunteer firefighter, suffered a heart attack and continuously received workers' compensation benefits until his death in 2002. His claimant applied for death benefits, alleging a causal link between the 1975 injury and his death. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) awarded benefits after denying the employer's request for a second adjournment to depose treating physicians, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The court found substantial evidence supporting the causal relationship between the heart attack and death, noting that a work-related injury need not be the sole cause of death. Additionally, the court upheld the WCLJ's denial of the adjournment, as the employer failed to provide a sufficient excuse for not scheduling depositions or serving subpoenas during the initial adjournment period.

Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsCausal RelationshipHeart AttackCongestive Heart FailureAdjournment DenialTreating Physician DepositionSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewMedical OpinionVolunteer Firefighter
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Dellauniversita v. Tek Precision Co.

The case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding a claim for death benefits. Claimant’s husband suffered a work-related injury in 1987 and later died. The claimant, as his widow, filed for death benefits. However, the claimant herself died before the causal relationship between her husband’s death and the 1987 incident could be established. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that her claim for death benefits abated upon her death. The appellate court affirmed this decision, citing precedents that claims for death benefits abate if a determination on the merits, such as causal relationship, has not been established prior to the claimant’s death.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsClaim AbatementCausal RelationshipAppellate ReviewProcedural IssuesPrecedentLegal Interpretation
References
3
Case No. ADJ3197408 (FRE 0226208)
Regular
Nov 21, 2011

Guadalupe Ayon (Deceased); Irena Ayon, Miguel Ayon, Erica Ayon, Department of Industrial Relations, Death Without Dependents Unit vs. Cal Grain and Hay; Zenith Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration for both the applicants and the defendant. The Board upheld the finding that the mother and sister were not dependents of the deceased worker, as they failed to prove a net financial benefit was provided to the household. Their argument for estate benefits under an unconstitutional statute was also rejected, with the Board noting that judicial decisions invalidating statutes apply retroactively. Consequently, the employer remains obligated to pay $125,000 to the Department of Industrial Relations for death without dependents.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDependent death benefitLabor Code section 4706.5(a)Fatal injuryDependencyPartial dependentFinancial dependencyNet financial benefitEstate benefitsUnconstitutional statute
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 7,207 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