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. 2017 NY Slip Op 07357
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 19, 2017

Matter of Kathleen NN. (Dennis NN.)

This case involves three neglect proceedings initiated by the Sullivan County Department of Family Services and the Attorney for the Child against Dennis NN. (father), Justin EE. (mother's boyfriend), and Angelica FF. (mother) concerning Kathleen NN., an alleged neglected child. The Family Court of Sullivan County initially dismissed all three petitions. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the dismissal concerning Dennis NN., finding that his actions of dropping the child during an altercation placed her in imminent danger of harm, thus granting the neglect petition against him and remitting the matter for a dispositional hearing. However, the Appellate Division affirmed the dismissals against Justin EE. and Angelica FF., concluding that there was insufficient evidence to prove neglect or that Justin EE. was a legal custodian at the time of the incident, and that the mother's conduct did not demonstrate imminent danger to the child.

Child NeglectFamily Court ActImminent DangerParental ResponsibilitySafety Plan Non-ComplianceAppellate DivisionChild CustodyPreponderance of EvidencePhysical AltercationChild Protective Report
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Lindsay W.

The Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York appealed an order from the Family Court, Queens County, which effectively dismissed a proceeding to continue the placement of a neglected child, Lindsay W. The Family Court had denied the Commissioner's request for a temporary extension of placement, citing the process server's error in service as an invalid excuse. The appellate court ruled that the Family Court abused its discretion by not granting the temporary extension, finding that the Commissioner had shown 'good cause' through good-faith attempts to notify the respondent mother and an excusable process server misunderstanding. The case was reversed and remitted to the Family Court to determine if the Commissioner's initial petition for extension, filed 11 days late, was also for 'good cause', which would then lead to a merits hearing on the extension of placement.

Child NeglectFamily Court ActPlacement ExtensionService of ProcessAbuse of DiscretionGood CauseParental RightsAppellate ReviewRemittiturTimely Filing
References
6
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 08350
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 17, 2015

Matter of Edubilio Andre R. (Andre R.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Family Court's orders of fact-finding and disposition, which determined that the respondent father, Andre R., permanently neglected his children. The Family Court had properly excused the petitioner agency, Cardinal McCloskey Community Services, from its duty to exercise diligent efforts for reunification. This decision was based on the father's felony conviction for sexual abuse, prior findings of sexual abuse against his daughter and medical neglect of his son, and expert testimony indicating that reunification would be traumatic for the children. The court noted the father's failure to participate in services or sexual offender programs while incarcerated. Additionally, appeals from the dispositional portions of the orders were dismissed due to the father's default at the hearings.

Child NeglectPermanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationSexual AbuseMedical NeglectDiligent Efforts ExcuseFamily Court AppealAppellate Division First DepartmentBest Interests of the ChildDefault at Dispositional Hearing
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 05, 2006

In re Ian H.

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order adjudicating a respondent's children neglected. The respondent, a substitute day-care worker, was accused of sexually abusing female children attending a day-care center operated by his wife. Petitioner initiated a neglect proceeding, alleging derivative neglect of the respondent's twin sons based on his inappropriate conduct with other children. The Family Court found that the respondent neglected three children by sexually abusing them, demonstrating a fundamental defect in parenting that derivatively neglected his own children. The Appellate Division affirmed this finding, concluding that out-of-court statements of the abused children were properly admitted and sufficiently corroborated, and the Family Court appropriately exercised its discretion in not compelling a child's testimony.

Child NeglectDerivative NeglectSexual AbuseFamily Court Act Article 10Out-of-court StatementsCorroborationHearsay ExceptionJudicial DiscretionParental JudgmentChild Testimony
References
13
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 06564
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2025

Matter of Raivyn BB. (Courtney BB.)

This case concerns appeals from Family Court orders adjudicating Raivyn BB. a neglected child due to alleged parental drug use by mother Courtney BB. and father Kip AA. The child tested positive for methamphetamines after birth, prompting neglect petitions. The Appellate Division reversed the neglect findings against both parents. The court found that the evidence did not establish a direct causal link between the mother's methamphetamine use and the child's impairment, noting potential withdrawal symptoms from prescribed Subutex. Furthermore, the father's conduct, including hostility or refusal to sign a birth certificate, was not deemed to constitute neglect, and no evidence showed his knowledge of the mother's drug use. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed.

Neglected ChildParental Drug UseChild ToxicologyMethamphetamineSubutexFamily Court Act Article 10Appellate ReviewCausative ConnectionImpairment of ChildMinimum Degree of Care
References
15
Case No. ADJ1924276 ADJ1449948 ADJ1052896 ADJ1110587
Regular
Jun 15, 2018

JOSE AVINA vs. HIGH-TECH SEATING\/HARTFORD, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, COMMERCIAL CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration after their lien was dismissed for failure to appear at a conference. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the lien claimant's claim of excusable neglect insufficient to excuse the failure to calendar the hearing. Despite procedural issues with service of the dismissal order, the Board determined the lien claimant's explanation for missing the hearing lacked a logical connection to the settlement discussions they claimed excused their oversight. A dissenting opinion argued the dismissal was invalid due to defective service and that excusable neglect should have warranted reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantExcusable NeglectPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienNotice of Intention to Dismiss LienWCJService of ProcessDue ProcessLabor Code Section 5903
References
0
Case No. ADJ1622633
Regular
Apr 04, 2011

SALVADOR CONTRERAS vs. M&C FARM LABOR, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, INTERCARE PASADENA, PAULA INSURANCE

This case involved an applicant seeking to reopen his workers' compensation claim due to new and further disability. The WCAB denied reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision that the applicant's petition to reopen was barred by the five-year statute of limitations. This was because the petition was improperly filed in the wrong district office, violating WCAB rules requiring filing in the office with venue. Despite the applicant's pro se status and his argument for liberal construction, the majority found no alleged excusable neglect and thus upheld the dismissal. A dissenting opinion argued that the applicant's actions demonstrated mistake and excusable neglect, and that the WCAB should have excused the procedural error to allow a hearing on the merits.

Petition to ReopenStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5410Labor Code Section 5804WCAB Rule 10390WCAB Rule 10450Proper VenueDistrict Office FilingMistakeInadvertence
References
6
Case No. N2361-72
Regular Panel Decision

In re Gigi B.

The case concerns a neglect proceeding against Patricia B. for the alleged neglect of her infant, Gigi, due to the mother's drug addiction. The Bureau of Child Welfare subpoenaed records from the New York State Narcotic Addiction Control Commission regarding Patricia B.'s rehabilitation, which both the commission and the mother argued were protected by statutory privilege under the Mental Hygiene Law. The court determined that any state privilege was waived by the commission's communication of Patricia B.'s drug test results and that the Family Court Act, specifically Section 1038, superseded the Mental Hygiene Law due to its more recent enactment and focus on child protection. Emphasizing the paramount importance of the child's due process rights, the court concluded that the privilege established by the Mental Hygiene Law, similar to other professional privileges, is overridden in child abuse and neglect situations. Consequently, the court denied the motion to quash the subpoena and overruled the objection to the introduction of the records, ordering them to be opened for review.

NeglectChild WelfareDrug AddictionStatutory PrivilegeFamily Court ActMental Hygiene LawWaiver of PrivilegeSubpoenaConfidentialityDue Process
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 1992

In re Jamie C.

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order in Broome County, which granted a petitioner's application to adjudicate the respondents' children as abused and/or neglected. The Family Court had found the father, James D., sexually and physically abused his daughter Jamie C. and neglected all four children, while the mother, Barbara C., sexually abused Jamie and neglected all four. On appeal, the finding of sexual abuse against the mother was reversed due to insufficient corroborating evidence and Jamie C.'s conflicting sworn testimony. However, the findings of the father's sexual and physical abuse, and both parents' neglect stemming from chronic alcohol abuse and violent behavior, were affirmed based on Jamie's credible testimony and other evidence presented.

Family LawChild AbuseChild NeglectSexual AbusePhysical AbuseAlcohol AbuseCredibility of TestimonyCorroboration of EvidenceAppellate ReviewFamily Court Act
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Camara R.

This appeal concerns the dismissal of a neglect petition against parents whose infant son, Antonio, twice suffered from nonorganic failure to thrive. Antonio showed significant weight gain during hospitalizations but lost weight at home, despite prior parental instructions. Evidence presented included the parents' resistance to medical advice, unsanitary home conditions, and the father's substance abuse. The Family Court initially found insufficient evidence of neglect, but the appellate court reversed, concluding that the petitioner had established a prima facie case of both direct neglect of Antonio and derivative neglect of his siblings. The matter was remitted to the Family Court for further proceedings.

NeglectFamily Court Act Article 10Failure to ThriveChild WelfareParental MisconductAppellate ReviewPrima Facie EvidenceChild Protective ServicesMedical NeglectSubstance Abuse
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 838 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