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

Vainchenker v. Vainchenker

The plaintiff husband appealed portions of a Supreme Court judgment concerning his divorce and ancillary relief. Key points of contention included the equitable distribution of his medical license, the maintenance awarded to his wife, and his contribution to their eldest child's college expenses. The appellate court affirmed that the husband's New York medical license constituted a marital asset, subject to equitable distribution due to his enhanced earning capacity from training during the marriage, and upheld the wife's share. However, the court found the maintenance award to the wife was an improvident exercise of discretion and deleted it, leading to a recalculation and increase in child support. Additionally, the judgment was modified to ensure child support payments would be credited towards college expenses when the eldest child resides away from home.

Equitable DistributionMarital AssetMedical LicenseMaintenanceChild SupportCollege ExpensesDivorceAppellate ReviewEnhanced Earning CapacityFamily Law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Abbo-Bradley v. City of Niagara Falls

Three families residing near the Love Canal Landfill initiated an action in New York State Supreme Court, Niagara County, seeking damages and equitable relief for personal injuries and property damage caused by alleged releases of toxic chemicals. The case was subsequently removed to federal court under original federal jurisdiction pursuant to CERCLA. Defendant Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. (GSH) filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief to establish a discovery protocol, requesting prior notice, contemporaneous access, and the opportunity for split samples during plaintiffs' environmental sampling activities. Plaintiffs opposed the motion, citing jurisdictional concerns, work product, and attorney-client privileges. The court, asserting its authority to maintain the status quo pending a remand decision, rejected the privilege claims and found that spoliation concerns warranted the injunction. Consequently, the court granted GSH's motion, enjoining plaintiffs from further environmental sampling without providing 96-hour written notice, contemporaneous access, and the opportunity for all parties to take split samples.

Environmental LitigationCERCLAPreliminary InjunctionDiscovery ProtocolSpoliation of EvidenceWork Product DoctrineAttorney-Client PrivilegeLove CanalToxic WasteHazardous Materials
References
18
Case No. 196-1545-260
Regular Panel Decision

Montague Pipeline Technologies Corp. v. Grace/Lansing & Grace Industries, Inc. (In Re Montague Pipeline Technologies Corp.)

The case involves a motion by Grace-Lansing and Grace Industries, Inc. (Grace) to remand an adversary proceeding back to the New York State Supreme Court, Kings County, and for relief from an automatic stay. The Debtor, Montague Pipeline Technologies, Inc., had removed the action, which concerned the confirmation of an arbitration award in favor of Grace, after filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The Court, presided over by Chief Judge Conrad B. Duberstein, applied the 'Drexel factors' to evaluate the request for remand, concluding that equitable grounds favored sending the action back to state court due to efficient administration of the bankruptcy estate, predominance of state law, and comity. The Court also granted Grace's motion for relief from the automatic stay, finding 'cause' based on the 'Sonnax factors,' to allow the state court to finalize the arbitration award and fix Grace's claim, thereby facilitating the Debtor's reorganization plan.

BankruptcyRemandAutomatic StayArbitration AwardState LawFederal Arbitration ActJudicial EconomyComityChapter 11Dispute Resolution
References
38
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Spodick v. Gold

The plaintiff, International, brought an action against Local 210 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and individual defendants Gold and Berger, seeking an accounting, money judgment, and equitable relief. The plaintiff claimed Local 8, a former affiliate, was indebted for unpaid per capita tax and disaffiliated to merge with Local 210. The court found no basis for accounting or equitable relief, stating the relationship was a simple debtor-creditor one and Local 8's actions were in its members' interests. The court dismissed claims against individual defendants as derivative. All causes of action were deemed insufficient, and the motions for dismissal were granted, allowing the plaintiff to file an amended complaint solely against Local 210 based on a theory of assumption of debt.

Dismissal of ComplaintInsufficiency of ComplaintAmended ComplaintUnion DisaffiliationUnion MergerPer Capita TaxDebtor-Creditor RelationshipEquitable Relief DeniedDerivative LiabilityAssumption of Debt Theory
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Viviano v. Allard

This case involves a postjudgment application for equitable distribution of a class action settlement by a former wife against her former husband. The parties were divorced in 1984, with all known marital property having been distributed. The husband became a member of a class action lawsuit against Continental Can Company, where his employment was terminated prior to the divorce, leading to a substantial monetary settlement in 1990. The wife, learning of this settlement in 1992, filed for equitable distribution, arguing the proceeds constituted marital property. The Supreme Court ordered a hearing, finding that the settlement proceeds, if known at the time of divorce, would have been considered marital property. The appellate court affirmed this decision, citing unusual circumstances where an asset was unknown to both parties at the time of the divorce, thereby justifying an opportunity for the wife to litigate the issue. The court held that benefits earned during the marriage, even if realized post-divorce, could be subject to equitable distribution.

Divorce LawEquitable DistributionMarital PropertyClass Action SettlementPostjudgment ReliefRes Judicata ExceptionAppellate ReviewUnforeseen AssetsDeferred CompensationFamily Law
References
8
Case No. 04-15739
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 19, 2006

Continental Casualty Co. v. Pfizer, Inc. (In re Quigley Co.)

Plaintiffs Continental Casualty Company and Continental Insurance Company initiated an adversary proceeding against Pfizer, Inc., Quigley Company, Inc. (a debtor-in-possession and Pfizer's subsidiary), and numerous other insurance companies. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that certain policies excluded coverage for asbestos-related claims, or alternatively, to reform them and apportion liability. Pfizer and Quigley moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim regarding anticipatory repudiation. A group of defendant insurers (Certain Insurers) sought to stay the proceeding and lift the automatic stay for arbitration. The court denied the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It stayed Counts One, Two, and Three, and Guildhall's cross-claim, pending the arbitration of coverage disputes, granting the Certain Insurers relief from the automatic stay to commence arbitration. Count Four, concerning anticipatory repudiation, was dismissed without prejudice.

BankruptcyInsurance Coverage DisputeAsbestos LiabilityDeclaratory Judgment ActArbitration AgreementStay of LitigationMotions to DismissAnticipatory RepudiationWellington AgreementPolicy Exclusions
References
52
Case No. 17-CV-3136 (RRM)
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2018

Cognetta v. Bonavita

The trustees of the Wine, Liquor & Distillery Workers Union Local 1-D Major Medical Plan sought a declaratory judgment to establish an equitable lien or constructive trust on any future recovery by defendants James and Nicole Bonavita from a state negligence action. The Plan had paid $110,000 in medical expenses for James Bonavita following a car accident. Defendants argued that New York General Obligation Law § 5-335 precluded reimbursement and that the action was premature. The court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs, ruling that ERISA preempts Section 5-335 because the Plan is self-funded. The court found the declaratory judgment to be appropriate equitable relief, establishing an equitable lien over future settlement or judgment funds, compelling defendants to hold such proceeds in trust for the Plan's benefit.

ERISASelf-Funded PlanEquitable LienConstructive TrustSubrogationReimbursementDeclaratory JudgmentPreemptionNew York General Obligation LawMake-Whole Doctrine
References
55
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Barnan Associates v. 196 Owner's Corp.

This case involves a dispute between Barnan Associates (plaintiff) and 196 Owner’s Corp. (defendant) regarding the termination of a Master Commercial Lease. Plaintiff sought equitable relief under the Condominium and Cooperative Protection and Abuse Relief Act (Abuse Relief Act), challenging the termination. Plaintiff argued that the lease predated the Act's effective date and that the termination notice was untimely. The court, presided over by District Judge Conner, granted Barnan Associates' motion for summary judgment, ruling that the Act only applies to contracts entered into after October 8, 1980, whereas the lease was from August 31, 1979. Additionally, the court found the termination notice ineffective because it was issued more than two years after the relinquishment of special developer control, which occurred on September 14, 1989. Consequently, the defendant's state law counterclaims were dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Condominium ConversionCooperative HousingAbuse Relief ActLease TerminationSummary Judgment MotionDeveloper ControlStatutory InterpretationTimelinessFederal JurisdictionState Law Counterclaims
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Turner v. Turner

After a 30-year marriage, the plaintiff wife initiated a divorce action in August 1991, seeking equitable distribution of marital property. The Supreme Court's initial distribution, which allocated approximately 62% of assets to the defendant and 38% to the plaintiff without explanation, was appealed by the plaintiff for equal division. The appellate court concurred, mandating equal division of net rental income and marital residence proceeds. Furthermore, recognizing the significant disparity in their retirement plans and the plaintiff's limited contribution period, the court ruled she was entitled to an equitable share of the defendant's pension. The plaintiff was also granted reimbursement for a $4,410 Workers' Compensation award confiscated by the defendant without proper offset proof. The judgment was modified and the matter remitted for property redistribution and consideration of counsel fees.

Equitable DistributionMarital PropertyDivorceWorkers' CompensationPension DivisionRental IncomeSpousal SupportMarital AssetsReimbursementCounsel Fees
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 1989

Smith v. Smith

In this case, the Supreme Court, Westchester County, initially granted equitable distribution of State lottery winnings by allocating 85% to the defendant husband and 15% to the plaintiff wife. The parties were married in 1982, and the defendant won $13.5 million in the lottery in 1985 through a pool with co-workers. Although the wife regularly played the lottery, the husband rarely did. The court found the winnings to be marital property but awarded the wife only 15% based on the ticket being acquired solely through the husband's efforts. On appeal, the judgment was unanimously reversed, with the appellate court determining that a more equitable distribution would be an equal division of the lottery winnings, citing the parties' equal contributions to the marriage, their treatment of it as a partnership, and the fact that the winnings were their only significant asset.

Equitable DistributionLottery WinningsMarital PropertySpousal ContributionsDomestic Relations LawProperty DivisionAppellate ReviewMatrimonial AssetsFinancial AssetsDissolution of Marriage
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 968 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