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

Castillo v. Schriro

Petitioner Castillo, a correction officer and domestic violence victim, challenged her employment termination by the New York City Department of Correction via an Article 78 proceeding. The court found that the respondents acted in bad faith and discriminated against her based on a temporary disability and her status as a domestic violence victim, violating the New York City Human Rights Law. Respondents failed to provide reasonable accommodations or follow internal policies for domestic violence victims. The petition was granted, her termination annulled, and she was ordered reinstated with back pay and benefits, with the case remanded for a lesser penalty.

Domestic ViolenceEmployment DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationProbationary EmployeeArticle 78 ProceedingReasonable AccommodationBad FaithNew York City Human Rights LawAWOLTermination
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2018

Matter of Bobbi B. (Bobby B.)

This case concerns an appeal by Bobby B., the father, against an order from the Family Court, Bronx County. The Family Court found the father neglected his child, Bobbi B., by engaging in domestic violence in her presence. The court's finding was based on the testimony of a shelter worker who witnessed the father assaulting the mother while she held their one-month-old child. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision, stating that there was no basis to overturn the credibility determinations. The court reiterated that even a single instance of domestic violence can be sufficient for a finding of neglect and properly discredited the father's denial of a domestic violence history due to a prior assault conviction and an existing order of protection.

Child neglectDomestic violenceFamily CourtAppellate DivisionCredibility determinationOrder of protectionChild endangermentThird-degree assaultInfant protectionParental neglect
References
4
Case No. Docket No. V-20843-4/02
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 27, 2004

Hector G. v. Josefina P.

This case addresses a child custody dispute between a mother and father involving the application of New York's Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). The mother brought her twin sons from the Dominican Republic to the United States after the father obtained a default custody order there. Allegations of extensive domestic violence against the mother and children by the father were subsequently raised in New York's Integrated Domestic Violence Court. The New York court assumed temporary emergency jurisdiction, contacted the Dominican court, which then declined to retain jurisdiction. Based on the significant connections of the mother and children to New York, the availability of substantial evidence, and domestic violence concerns, the court assumed full modification jurisdiction over the Dominican custody order, concluding that New York is the more convenient forum.

UCCJEAInternational Custody DisputeDomestic Violence AllegationsTemporary Emergency JurisdictionModification JurisdictionInconvenient Forum AnalysisDominican Republic Custody OrderHome State JurisdictionParental KidnappingChild Relocation
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nicholson v. Scoppetta

This federal class action addresses three certified questions from the Second Circuit regarding New York's child protective proceedings. Plaintiffs, mothers who experienced domestic violence, challenged the New York City Administration for Children's Services' policy of removing children deemed neglected due to exposure to such violence. The Court ruled that merely witnessing domestic abuse does not presumptively establish neglect, requiring specific proof of harm and a parent's failure to exercise minimum care. It also clarified that while emotional injury from witnessing violence can warrant child removal, such decisions must be based on a fact-intensive inquiry, balancing the risks of remaining at home against the trauma of removal, and considering efforts to prevent removal. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that no blanket presumption for removal exists; particularized evidence tailored to the child's best interests is always necessary.

Child Protective ProceedingsDomestic ViolenceChild NeglectChild RemovalDue ProcessFourth AmendmentFamily Court ActMinimum Degree of CareImminent DangerBest Interests of the Child
References
26
Case No. 2026 NY Slip Op 00144; 2022-09453; Ind. No. 12564/08
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2026

People v. Nymeen C.

Nymeen C. appealed an order from the Supreme Court in Kings County that denied her motion for resentencing under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act (DVSJA). The Appellate Division, Second Department, addressed whether such an order, dismissed 'without prejudice,' is appealable, concluding that it is appealable as a denial of resentencing. However, the Appellate Division affirmed the original order, finding that Nymeen C. failed to provide corroborating evidence of ongoing domestic violence at the time of the offense in 2008, despite presenting evidence of past abuse. The court clarified the appealability of such orders, distinguishing its stance from the Third Department's precedent.

Domestic Violence Survivors Justice ActDVSJAresentencingappealabilityCPL 440.47Penal Law 60.12appellate reviewcorroborating evidencemanslaughterKings County
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wissink v. Wissink

This appeal concerns a contentious custody dispute over Andrea, a teenaged girl who strongly prefers to live with her father. Despite the father's documented history of domestic violence against the mother, the Family Court initially awarded him custody. The appellate court, through S. Miller, J., reversed this decision, criticizing the Family Court for failing to order comprehensive psychological evaluations. The court highlighted the necessity of a thorough assessment, especially given Andrea's preference for the abuser and her denial of the witnessed domestic violence. The case was remitted to the Family Court, Orange County, for a new custody hearing following an in-depth forensic examination, with temporary custody remaining with the father.

Custody DisputeDomestic ViolenceChild PreferencePsychological EvaluationBest Interest of the ChildAppellate ReviewFamily LawChild SupportRemittalParental Fitness
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Michael M.

The Commissioner of Social Services initiated a proceeding against Leonard M. and Mrs. M. (the mother) alleging sexual abuse of their sons, Michael and Dennis, neglect due to domestic violence, and educational neglect. The court dismissed the sexual abuse allegations against the father, finding insufficient evidence of sexual intent and noting potential influence from the mother's psychological issues. However, the court sustained findings of neglect against the father for exposing the children to consistent domestic violence, causing emotional and psychological impairment. Neglect was also sustained against the mother due to her mental impairment, which hindered her ability to care for the children's best interests, and against both parents for educational neglect resulting from the children's excessive school absences.

References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 17, 2009

In re Syira W.

This case involves an appeal by a respondent mother from a Family Court order in Erie County, entered on August 17, 2009, which adjudicated her three children as neglected under Family Court Act article 10. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Family Court's decision. The mother's appeal brought up for review the underlying fact-finding order, despite the dispositional order having expired. The court found sufficient evidence to establish neglect, specifically regarding the presence of at least one child during a domestic violence incident. The mother's contention regarding the insufficiency of evidence was not preserved for appellate review; furthermore, the court's credibility determinations regarding a domestic violence case worker's testimony were entitled to deference.

Child NeglectDomestic ViolenceFamily Court Act Article 10Sufficiency of EvidenceCredibility DeterminationAppellate ReviewFact-Finding OrderOrder of DispositionExpired OrderErie County
References
4
Case No. 884/15
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 03, 2025

People v. K.D.

K.D., convicted of Murder in the Second Degree and originally sentenced to 18 years to life, sought resentencing under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act (DVSJA). The court found that K.D. was a victim of substantial domestic violence by the decedent, Norberto Valentin Cruz, which significantly contributed to her criminal behavior, and that her original sentence was unduly harsh. Despite the severity of the crime and the victim's family's anguish, the court considered K.D.'s remorse, rehabilitation efforts, lack of prior criminal history, and strong family support. Balancing these factors, the court vacated the original sentence and ordered a resentencing of 11 years imprisonment followed by 5 years of post-release supervision.

Domestic Violence Survivors Justice ActDVSJAResentencingMurder Second DegreeDomestic Violence VictimCriminal Procedure Law 440.47Penal Law 60.12Judicial DecisionRehabilitation EffortsMitigation Factors
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Jean

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order adjudicating Billy Jean II. a neglected child. The respondents, Ray II. and Colleen II., are the child's parents. The neglect finding was based on multiple reports of inadequate guardianship, domestic violence, poor hygiene, and unsanitary living conditions, including an incident where Ray II. allegedly assaulted Colleen II. while intoxicated in the child's presence. The Family Court found the testimonies of the respondents and a witness to be incredible, and concluded that the child was neglected due to the parents' failure to provide proper care and supervision, compounded by alcoholism and domestic violence. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's finding, stating there was sufficient proof to sustain the neglect determination.

Child Neglect AdjudicationDomestic Violence ImpactAlcoholism in Parental HomeUnsanitary Living ConditionsInadequate Parental SupervisionFamily Court JurisdictionAppellate ReviewCredibility of WitnessesSufficiency of EvidenceChild Protective Proceedings
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 228 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