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
Jan 21, 2015

Local Union No. 40 of the International Ass'n of Bridge v. Car-Win Construction Inc.

The plaintiffs, several local unions and related benefit funds, initiated a lawsuit against Car-Win Construction, Inc. and CRV Precast Construction, LLC, alleging violations of a collective bargaining agreement and failure to contribute to benefit funds. Following the defendants' consistent non-compliance with discovery orders and failure to produce financial records, the plaintiffs moved for a default judgment. Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger issued a Report and Recommendation, advising that the default judgment be granted, a post-default inquest for damages be conducted, and an audit of the defendants' financial records for specific periods be ordered. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain subsequently adopted this Report and Recommendation in its entirety, finding no clear error. The court also approved the plaintiffs' application for reasonable attorneys' fees incurred due to the defendants' dilatory tactics in discovery.

Default JudgmentDiscovery SanctionsERISACollective Bargaining AgreementBenefit Fund ContributionsAlter-Ego LiabilityFinancial AuditWage ViolationsFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 37Judicial Discretion
References
75
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 21, 2006

Rivera v. Barnhart

Plaintiff Russell Rivera, Jr. challenged the Commissioner of Social Security's decision denying him Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Frank Maas, who issued a Report and Recommendation to remand the action for further administrative proceedings, citing deficiencies in the plaintiff's hearing. After defendant objected to a time limit, an Amended Report and Recommendation was issued, omitting the disputed time limitation. District Judge Richard J. Holwell, finding no clear error, adopted the Amended Report in its entirety, granting the Commissioner’s motion. The court's decision was based on the Administrative Law Judge's failure to fully develop the administrative record and adequately consider the treating physician’s opinion, Dr. Asbury, whose findings differed from a nonexamining medical consultant.

Social Security BenefitsSupplemental Security IncomeDisability DeterminationAdministrative Law Judge (ALJ) ReviewRemand OrderTreating Physician RuleMedical AssessmentHIV/AIDS ImpairmentHepatitis C DiagnosisProcedural Error
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 18, 1995

Miller v. Chater

Plaintiff initiated this action to seek review of the Secretary of Health and Human Services' decision establishing June 1, 1992, as the onset date for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits due to alleged disability from mental retardation. Magistrate Judge Carol E. Heckman issued a Report and Recommendation, advising denial of the Secretary's motion for judgment on the pleadings and remand for reconsideration. The Magistrate Judge found errors in the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) assessment of the plaintiff's functional limitations, particularly regarding social domain, and noted the ALJ's failure to consider the retroactivity inference from the Zebley class action stipulation. District Judge Arcara reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and with no objections filed, adopted its findings. Consequently, the defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings was denied, and the case was remanded to the Secretary for further reconsideration, emphasizing a misapplication of post-Zebley requirements for adjudicating children’s SSI benefits claims.

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)Disability BenefitsMental RetardationChild Disability ClaimsAdministrative ReviewSocial Security ActAge-appropriate functioningMedical EvidenceFunctional LimitationsOnset Date
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 02, 2010

Lyons Partnership, L.P. v. D & L Amusement & Entertainment, Inc.

Plaintiffs Lyons Partnership, L.P. and HIT Entertainment Inc. initiated a copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit against D & L Amusement & Entertainment Inc., Razzle Kidazzle Inc., Linda Lippo, All in One Entertainment, Inc., and John R. Albuja. The defendants were accused of infringing on the intellectual property rights of popular children's characters, Barney® and Bob the Builder®, by using unauthorized counterfeit costumes for entertainment services. Due to the defendants' failure to respond, Magistrate Judge Marilyn Go issued a Report and Recommendation, finding them liable for various Lanham Act and Copyright Act violations. Senior District Judge Sterling B. Johnson subsequently adopted this report in its entirety. As a result, a permanent injunction was granted against the defendants, and they were ordered to pay statutory damages, attorneys' fees, and costs for their willful infringement.

Intellectual PropertyCopyright InfringementTrademark InfringementDefault JudgmentLanham ActStatutory DamagesPermanent InjunctionAttorneys' FeesChildren's CharactersCounterfeit Goods
References
72
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gelber v. Stryker Corp.

Jeanette Gelber and Hugh Gelber sued Stryker Corporation, Howmedica Osteonics, and Stryker Orthopedics, Inc., collectively 'Stryker,' for medical device liability concerning a defective Trident hip replacement system. Plaintiffs alleged negligence, breach of warranty, strict products liability, and loss of consortium, stemming from a defectively manufactured device and failures to warn or report issues. Defendants moved to dismiss based on federal preemption and failure to state a claim. District Judge P. Kevin Castel partially granted and partially denied the motion, allowing defective manufacturing claims (negligence and strict products liability) and certain express warranty claims to proceed. Other claims, including failure to warn, failure to report, and implied warranty, were dismissed due to preemption or statute of limitations.

Medical Device LiabilityProduct LiabilityFederal Preemption DoctrineMedical Device Amendments Act (MDA)Strict Products LiabilityNegligence ClaimsBreach of Express WarrantyDefective ManufacturingClass III Medical DeviceHip Prosthesis
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 26, 1987

People v. Miller

This appeal concerns a judgment of conviction from Rochester City Court, entered August 26, 1987, convicting defendant-appellant Miller of a probation violation and sentencing him to one year in Monroe County Jail. Miller raised two issues: the failure to provide a written copy of probation orders at sentencing and sentencing without an updated presentence investigative report. The court found that while CPL 410.10 (1) mandates written probation orders at sentencing, the delayed provision by a probation officer before conditions took effect did not prejudice Miller's substantial rights, thus not warranting reversal. However, the court concluded that the failure to obtain an updated presentence investigative report before resentencing, nine months after the original report, constituted reversible error under CPL 390.20 (2) (b) based on established legal precedents. Consequently, the conviction was reversed, and the matter remitted to Rochester City Court for an updated presentence investigation report and resentencing.

Probation violationSentencing procedureCriminal Procedure LawWritten probation ordersPresentence investigation reportRight of allocutionAppellate reviewConviction reversalRemand for resentencingMisdemeanor sentencing
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 29, 2010

Campbell v. Astrue

Bruce Campbell (Plaintiff) filed an action seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his application for Supplemental Security Income. Magistrate Judge Victor E. Bianchini issued a Report-Recommendation, which Chief Judge Norman A. Mordue adopted. The case involves a claimant's disability determination, focusing on his alleged illiteracy, residual functional capacity (RFC), mental impairments, and obesity. The court identified several deficiencies in the administrative law judge's (ALJ) decision, including an unsupported finding regarding the plaintiff's education level, a potentially flawed RFC assessment due to reliance on a non-medical opinion, and a failure to consider a reviewing psychologist's opinion on mental impairments. Consequently, the court remanded the Commissioner's decision for further proceedings to properly develop the record on the plaintiff's literacy, reconsider the RFC, and re-evaluate his mental impairments.

Social Security ActSupplemental Security IncomeDisability BenefitsResidual Functional CapacityIlliteracyMental ImpairmentsObesityVocational FactorsMedical-Vocational RulesAdministrative Law Judge
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Doe v. City of New York

Plaintiff was the victim of a violent sexual assault and robbery on Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) property near the Shea Stadium/Willets Avenue subway station. She commenced an action against the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA), the City of New York, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), and LIRR, alleging negligence, including failure to maintain the premises in a safe condition by not removing a shantytown inhabited by homeless individuals, and failure to report the presence of illegal aliens to federal authorities. The court granted summary judgment to all defendants. It found NYCTA not liable as the incident did not occur on its property. The City was not liable for negligent performance of a governmental function (police protection) due to the absence of a special relationship with the plaintiff. MTA/LIRR were also found immune, as their actions concerning homeless policy were considered governmental functions, not proprietary. Furthermore, the claim regarding failure to report illegal aliens was dismissed as the relevant statute (8 USC § 1373) does not impose an affirmative duty or create a private right of action. The plaintiff's request for further discovery was denied.

Sexual AssaultRobberyNegligence ClaimGovernmental ImmunityProprietary FunctionHomeless PolicySummary Judgment GrantedDiscovery SanctionsLIRR PropertyNYCTA Liability
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Parris v. ACME Bus Corp.

Pro se plaintiff Debbie L. Parris brought an action against Acme Bus Corp., alleging race discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. Magistrate Judge Brown issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) suggesting the motion be granted due to plaintiff's failure to establish a prima facie case or rebut defendant's legitimate reason for termination (unexcused absence). After a de novo review of plaintiff's objections, District Judge Joseph F. Bianco adopted the R&R in its entirety, granting summary judgment to the defendant and dismissing the complaint. The court found no evidence to support an inference of racial discrimination, a hostile work environment, or a cognizable retaliation claim.

Title VIIRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary JudgmentPro Se LitigationEmployment LawFederal Civil ProcedureMagistrate Judge R&RDe Novo Review
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2011

Santillan v. Henao

Plaintiff Juan Jose Santillan sought unpaid overtime wages and spread of hours pay from defendants Custom Stainless Steel Corp. and Walter Henao under the FLSA and New York Labor Law. Magistrate Judge Marilyn D. Go issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) proposing a default judgment in the total amount of $60,193.42, comprising damages, prejudgment interest, attorneys' fees, and costs. Senior District Judge Block adopted the R&R without de novo review, citing the defendants' failure to object. The final judgment includes $25,213.21 in overtime wages, $3,127.90 in spread of hours pay, and a total of $15,907.83 in liquidated damages, in addition to prejudgment interest, attorneys' fees, and costs, finding the defendants liable for violating wage and record-keeping provisions.

Overtime WagesFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawDefault JudgmentSpread of Hours PayLiquidated DamagesPrejudgment InterestAttorney's FeesRecord-Keeping ViolationsWage Claims
References
54
Showing 1-10 of 7,750 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