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

State ex rel. Dunn v. Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children

Maureen M. Dunn filed a writ of habeas corpus to regain custody of "Baby Girl" Dunn, born April 6, 1986, after executing a surrender for adoption to Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children (CHB) on May 1, 1986. The child was placed with prospective adoptive parents, John and Mary Doe, on April 10, 1986. Dunn attempted to revoke her surrender on May 21, 1986, within the 30-day period stipulated by Social Services Law § 384(5). The adoptive parents moved to dismiss or transfer the case, arguing against Supreme Court jurisdiction. The court retained jurisdiction and, following hearings, addressed Dunn's claims of fraud, duress, or coercion in the surrender's execution, which it ultimately denied despite concerns about CHB's procedures and a witness's credibility. The court also clarified the application of Social Services Law §§ 383(6) and 384(5) regarding the natural mother's rights post-surrender, ruling that Dunn lost her presumption of superiority once the child was placed in an adoptive home, requiring the custody determination to be based solely on the child's best interests. Considering the stability, financial security, and family ties of the adoptive parents versus the natural mother's temporary employment, uncertain support from the natural father, and past substance use during pregnancy, the court found it in the child's best interest to remain with the adoptive parents and be adopted by them.

AdoptionChild CustodyHabeas CorpusSurrender of Parental RightsBest Interests of the ChildParental RightsSocial Services LawRevocation of SurrenderFraudDuress
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dunn v. Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children

This case involves a plaintiff seeking damages for wrongful deprivation of child custody and social work malpractice against the Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children and Sister Rosalie Gilson. The court denied the defendants' cross-motion to dismiss the complaint, affirming the viability of both causes of action. The plaintiff's attempt to amend the complaint by adding various religious organizations and an individual as new defendants was unsuccessful due to a lack of sufficient factual basis for their alleged involvement or supervisory capacity. However, the court granted the plaintiff's motion to compel the defendants to respond to a demand for insurance agreements.

Child Custody DeprivationSocial Work MalpracticeAmended Complaint MotionMotion to Dismiss ComplaintDiscovery OrderInsurance DisclosureRespondeat Superior LiabilityProfessional Misconduct AllegationsParental Rights InterferenceAgency Supervision
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anderson v. Bernstein

The petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a July 28, 1977, determination by the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, which affirmed a local agency's decision to discontinue her aid to dependent children grant. The Commissioner's decision was based on the petitioner's alleged failure to disclose biweekly support payments from her husband, a finding supported by his signed statement and an agency worksheet. However, neither the husband nor the agency worker testified at the fair hearing. The court found that the evidence presented was insufficient to refute the petitioner's testimony that she had not received support payments from her husband after February 1977. Consequently, the petition was granted, the determination annulled, and the case remitted to the State commissioner for a new hearing.

Public AssistanceAid to Dependent ChildrenFair HearingSufficiency of EvidenceSupport PaymentsDue ProcessAdministrative ReviewRemandSocial Services LawCPLR Article 78
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Serafin v. Pleasant Valley Wine Co.

This case is an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision, filed October 19, 1982, which denied benefits to a claimant widow and two dependent children. The claim stemmed from the death of the decedent, an assistant sales manager for Pleasant Valley Wine Company, who died of a myocardial infarction on November 2, 1976, allegedly after carrying wine cases for work. The carrier contested the claim due to untimely filing and lack of employer notification under section 18 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. Conflicting medical opinions were presented regarding the causal connection between the decedent's work activity and his death. The Board concluded that the application was untimely filed, prejudicing the employer, and found no credible evidence of an accident arising from employment, nor any advance payment of compensation. The court affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial evidence supporting the Board's findings and its power to resolve conflicting medical opinions, as well as the prejudice to the employer from the untimely claim.

Untimely ClaimWorkers CompensationMyocardial InfarctionCausal ConnectionEmployer NotificationConflicting Medical OpinionsPrejudiceScope of EmploymentAccidentDependent Benefits
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brukhman v. Giuliani

This case addresses a dispute between welfare recipients participating in New York City's Work Experience Program (WEP) and City and State social services departments. Plaintiffs, recipients of Home Relief (HR) and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (ADC), claimed they were not receiving fair economic credit for work performed, as their hours were calculated using the Federal minimum wage instead of comparable wages for similar work. They sought class certification and a preliminary injunction. The court granted class certification and intervention for proposed plaintiffs-intervenors. It also denied the defendants' cross-motions to dismiss, ruling that administrative remedies would be futile. Ultimately, the court granted a preliminary injunction, mandating that the City defendants prospectively calculate WEP participants' hours based on the higher of the State/Federal minimum wage or the rate for comparable work by regular employees, citing Social Services Law and the New York State Constitution.

Work Experience Program (WEP)Welfare ReformPublic AssistanceHome Relief (HR)Aid to Families with Dependent Children (ADC)Class ActionPreliminary InjunctionWage ComparabilityMinimum Wage LawSocial Services Legislation
References
14
Case No. ADJ1940516 (GOL 0101910)
Regular
Apr 29, 2011

TONY COSTANTINO (Deceased), ELLIE COSTANTINO (Widow), CIERA MILLENDER (Dependent) vs. SANTA BARBARA SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case concerns whether a stepdaughter is entitled to the conclusive presumption of total dependency for workers' compensation death benefits under Labor Code section 3501. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the prior award, holding that the conclusive presumption does not apply to stepchildren absent legal adoption. The Board found insufficient evidence regarding the stepdaughter's actual dependency and returned the matter for further proceedings to develop the record on this issue. The WCAB clarified that while stepchildren can be dependents, the specific statutory presumption of total dependency is limited to "children" under the law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryDeath BenefitsDependencyLabor Code Section 3501Conclusive PresumptionStepchildPartial DependentReconsiderationWCJ
References
3
Case No. ADJ1298520
Regular
Dec 24, 2010

CLUSEGUN AFOLAYAN (DECEASED), OLUWASEUN AFOLAYAN, et al vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA CDCR, CALIFORNIA REHABILITATION CENTER, Legally Uninsured, SCIF/STATE CONTRACTS

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board reconsidered a WCJ's award of dependency benefits to three adult children of a deceased worker. The WCJ had awarded $192,000 total, based on the children being total dependents despite the widow electing CalPERS benefits which typically bar other death benefits. The Board agreed that the adult children are entitled to benefits under Labor Code section 4702, as the widow's CalPERS election does not necessarily exclude other dependents with good cause. However, the Board disagreed with the WCJ's calculation method and remanded the case for a new decision, directing the adult children to divide the difference between the maximum benefit for a widow with dependents and the benefit for a widow without dependents.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDependency benefitsLabor Code Section 4702Adult childrenDeath benefitsLabor Code Section 4707CalPERS special death benefitGood causeTotal dependentsWidow's benefits
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Lawrence Children

This consolidated opinion addresses a motion brought by minor parents, Barbara Allen and Gail Lawrence, who are respondents in separate neglect proceedings initiated by the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS). The parents, who are or recently were in foster care, argue that ACS has a conflict of interest in prosecuting neglect cases against individuals for whom it also serves as parens patriae. They sought an order to relieve ACS as petitioner and appoint a special prosecutor. The court, presided over by Daniel Turbow, J., denied the motion, concluding that no legal basis exists for the requested relief, as any alleged conflict is inherent in ACS’s statutory obligations. However, the court urged ACS to consider the age of minor parents in such cases and suggested utilizing Social Services Law § 398 to assume care of destitute children without necessarily imposing a neglect finding, emphasizing that minors should not be held to the same standard of care as adults.

Child NeglectFoster CareMinor ParentsConflict of InterestSpecial ProsecutorFamily Court Act Article 10Social Services LawParens PatriaeLaw GuardianStandard of Care for Minors
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

John R. v. State of New York Office of Children and Family Services

Petitioners Patricia R. and John R. were 'indicated' for child maltreatment after their children had continued contact with an uncle who had sexually abused their oldest daughter. Despite being explicitly instructed by a child protective services caseworker to prevent any contact, the children reported seeing and greeting the uncle. Patricia R. even sent the youngest child to the uncle's apartment. The petitioners challenged this determination in a CPLR article 78 proceeding, requesting the report be amended to unfounded. However, the court confirmed the determination, finding substantial evidence that the children's physical, mental, or emotional condition was impaired or in imminent danger due to the petitioners' failure to exercise a minimum degree of care in supervision.

Child MaltreatmentChild AbuseSexual AbuseParental NeglectFailure to SuperviseCPLR Article 78Administrative ReviewSubstantial EvidenceFamily LawChild Protection
References
5
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 06597 [222 AD3d 560]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2023

Matter of L.V.M. (Simon S.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the Family Court's finding that the subject children, L.V.M. and M.D.M., are abused children. The court found that the preponderance of evidence supported the abuse findings, determining the children's out-of-court statements were reliable and corroborated. Both children described similar patterns of sexual abuse by their stepfather, which were cross-corroborated by each other's accounts and other evidence, including parental admissions. The court rejected arguments regarding alleged motives for the children to lie and issues with translation or a nonexpert's testimony on demeanor, upholding the Family Court's credibility determinations.

Child AbuseSexual AbuseCorroboration of Child StatementsFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewCredibility DeterminationsOut-of-court StatementsParental ConductStepfather AbuseChild Protective Services
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 849 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