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. 13-ev-3288; 13-cv-4244
Regular Panel Decision

Alzheimer's Disease Resource Center, Inc. v. Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Ass'n

This case involves two related lawsuits stemming from the disaffiliation of the Alzheimer’s Disease Resource Center, Inc. (ADRC) from the Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association (the Association). In case 13-ev-3288, ADRC alleged unfair competition, false advertising, and other claims. The Court denied dismissal for false advertising under the Lanham Act, New York General Business Law § 349, and unjust enrichment, but granted dismissal for trademark infringement, common law unfair competition, UCC violations, conversion, tortious interference, and fraud. In case 13-cv-4244, ADRC alleged breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets related to donor lists. The Court granted the Association's motion to dismiss this complaint in its entirety. Punitive damages were stricken for Lanham Act and unjust enrichment claims.

Unfair CompetitionLanham ActFalse AdvertisingTrademark InfringementNew York General Business Law § 349Unjust EnrichmentMotion to DismissBreach of ContractTrade Secret MisappropriationConversion
References
55
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 01860 [203 AD3d 1424]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2022

Matter of Mascali v. Town/Village of Harrison

Charles Mascali, a police officer, filed a workers' compensation claim in 2017 for injuries (chronic pulmonary disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease, dyspnea, shortness of breath) sustained at the World Trade Center site on September 11, 2001. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially established the claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this in June 2020 due to insufficient medical evidence of causation. Mascali applied for reconsideration and/or full Board review, which the Board denied in August 2020. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's denial, finding it was not arbitrary and capricious, as Mascali's appeal concerned only the denial of reconsideration and not the merits of the initial June 2020 decision.

Workers' CompensationAppellate ReviewReconsideration DenialMedical Causation9/11 InjuriesChronic Pulmonary DiseaseGastroesophageal Reflux DiseasePolice OfficerBoard ReviewAbuse of Discretion
References
9
Case No. 531185
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2021

Matter of Lewandowski v. Safeway Envtl. Corp.

Zdzislaw Lewandowski, a former World Trade Center cleanup worker, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that disallowed his claim for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Lewandowski sought benefits for various ailments, including depression, breathing problems, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and rhinitis. The Board had established his claims for GERD and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) but maintained the disallowance for COPD due to insufficient evidence of a causal relationship. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision regarding the disallowance of the COPD claim, finding it supported by substantial evidence. However, the court reversed the Board's denial to revisit Lewandowski's date of disablement and average weekly wage, remitting the matter for consideration of the date most beneficial to the claimant under Workers' Compensation Law § 164, and for further proceedings consistent with its decision.

World Trade Center cleanupChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseGERDPTSDAgoraphobiaPanic DisorderCausationMedical EvidenceDate of DisablementAverage Weekly Wage
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 23, 2000

Ramnarine v. Memorial Center for Cancer & Allied Diseases

Jagdeo Ramnarine, an employee of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, suffered a laceration at the Memorial Center for Cancer and Allied Diseases. He subsequently filed a negligence lawsuit. The defendant, Memorial Center, moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff's claim was barred by the Workers’ Compensation Law § 11, as both the Center and the Hospital operate as a single integrated employer despite their separate legal entities. The Supreme Court initially denied this motion. However, the appellate court reversed the decision, granting summary judgment to the defendant. The court found substantial evidence supporting the integrated employer argument, thereby limiting the plaintiff's remedy to workers' compensation benefits and dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims against the defendant.

Workers' Compensation ExclusivityIntegrated Employer DoctrineSummary Judgment ReversalNegligence ClaimCross Claims DismissedCorporate Alter EgoCommon ControlBronx CountyAppellate DivisionLabor Law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Elaine W. v. Joint Diseases North General Hospital, Inc.

Plaintiffs, including Elaine W., sued Joint Diseases North General Hospital for unlawful sexual discrimination due to its policy of excluding pregnant women from its drug detoxification program. The hospital defended its blanket exclusion on medical grounds, citing a lack of specialized equipment, obstetricians, and licensing for obstetrical care. After conflicting rulings in lower courts, with the Appellate Division siding with the hospital, the New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division's decision. The Court ruled that the hospital must prove its blanket exclusion is medically warranted at trial, rejecting the idea that a mere medical explanation, when disputed, validates a discriminatory policy. The case emphasizes that distinctions based on pregnancy constitute sexual discrimination under New York's Human Rights Law, requiring individual assessment unless a complete medical impossibility of safe treatment is demonstrated.

Sexual DiscriminationPregnancy DiscriminationDrug Detoxification ProgramHospital PolicyMedical JustificationHuman Rights LawExecutive LawAppellate ReviewSummary JudgmentBurden of Proof
References
11
Case No. Index No. 161136/17 Appeal No. 15141 Case No. 2021-02236
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 2022

Quiroz v. Memorial Hosp. for Cancer & Allied Diseases

Jose Alfonso Perez Quiroz, a construction worker, sustained injuries after falling from an unstable scaffold at a site managed by Memorial Hospital for Cancer and Allied Diseases and general contractor Turner Construction Company. He initiated legal action under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court initially denied his motion for partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and dismissed his Labor Law § 241 (6) claim. However, the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed the Supreme Court's decision, granting Quiroz's motion for summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1), finding the unsecured scaffold to be a proximate cause of his fall. The appellate court subsequently dismissed the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim as academic.

Construction AccidentScaffold FallLabor Law Section 240(1)Labor Law Section 241(6)Industrial Code ViolationsSummary Judgment AppealPlaintiff LiabilityDefendant LiabilityProximate CausationRecalcitrant Worker Defense
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 16, 2002

Claim of Gandolfo v. MTK Electronics

Claimant, employed by MTK Electronics, developed Hodgkin’s disease due to exposure to trichloroethylene and trichloroethane. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found a causally related occupational disease and awarded benefits, a decision affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The Board emphasized the claimant's treating physician's expert testimony, which established a link between the disease and chemical exposure at work. The employer's requests for reconsideration or full Board review were denied. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the causal link between claimant's employment and her occupational disease.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseHodgkin's DiseaseChemical ExposureTrichloroethyleneTrichloroethaneCausalityExpert TestimonyMedical OpinionBoard Review
References
11
Case No. ADJ2767223 (SFO 404890) ADJ3039110 (SFO 435980) ADJ2891334 (OAK 300591)
Regular
Oct 03, 2014

DIEDRE THORNTON CLARK vs. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY

This case concerns an applicant with multiple cumulative industrial injuries, including gastroesophageal reflux disease and sleep disorder, resulting in a WCJ finding of 100% permanent disability. The Board rescinded this decision, finding that the WCJ failed to address apportionment of permanent disability to prior stipulated awards and a subsequent cumulative injury. The case is remanded for further development of the record to properly apportion permanent disability between the applicant's prior injuries and the 2003 cumulative injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPacific Bell Telephone CompanyDeirdre Thornton ClarkJoint Findings And OrdersAdministrative Law JudgeIndustrial InjuryCumulative PeriodGastroesophageal Reflux DiseaseSleep DisorderPermanent Disability
References
11
Case No. ADJ165327 (LAO 0874327) ADJ3892641 (LAO 0874626)
Regular
May 28, 2019

AGUSTIN RUIZ vs. THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC, AIG, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision grants reconsideration and amends a prior ruling regarding Agustin Ruiz's claims against Thermo Fisher Scientific, insured by AIG and Travelers Insurance. The Board affirmed the original decision's finding of injury AOE/COE to the applicant's low back, psyche, and gastroesophageal reflux disease/gastroduodenitis. It established a single combined award of 29% permanent disability, jointly and severally liable for AIG and Travelers, and ordered ongoing medical treatment administered by Travelers.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationAOE/COEPermanent DisabilityApportionmentJoint and Several LiabilityContributionReimbursementTemporary Disability Indemnity
References
0
Case No. 526652
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 15, 2018

Matter of Hughes v. World Trade Ctr. Volunteerr Fund

The case involves Rachel Hughes, a volunteer at the World Trade Center site, who established a claim for multiple injuries including gastroesophageal reflux disease, asthma, PTSD, depression, and anxiety, for which she was awarded workers' compensation benefits. Her benefits were later suspended. She sought an award for causally-related lost time, which a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially granted from March 11, 2008, through October 27, 2016. However, the Workers' Compensation Board modified this decision, affirming entitlement to continued medical treatment but rescinding the award for lost time from July 10, 2009, through October 27, 2016, due to insufficient medical evidence. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding its rejection of the claimant's clinical psychologist's testimony as unreliable was justified due to inconsistencies in his statements and notes. The Court reiterated that the burden lies with the claimant to establish a continuing causally-related disability, and the Board's finding was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationVolunteer InjuriesGastroesophageal Reflux DiseaseExtrinsic AsthmaChronic SinusitisPosttraumatic Stress DisorderDepressionAnxietyDisability BenefitsMedical Evidence
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 589 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