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

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 17 v. Union Concrete & Construction Corp.

Plaintiff International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 17, AFL-CIO ("Local 17") filed a grievance against Union Concrete and Construction Corporation ("UCC") to compel arbitration regarding UCC's emergency snow removal work for Erie County in November 2014, alleging violations of their Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). UCC argued the work was not covered by the CBA's "Heavy and/or Highway Construction" definition, rendering the arbitration clause inapplicable. Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation to grant UCC's motion for summary judgment and deny Local 17's. United States District Judge Richard J. Arcara conducted a de novo review and adopted the Magistrate Judge's findings in their entirety, concluding that the emergency snow removal work did not constitute "Heavy and/or Highway Construction" under the CBA. Consequently, Local 17’s motion for summary judgment to compel arbitration was denied, and UCC’s motion for summary judgment was granted, leading to the closure of the case.

Labor Management Relations ActCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrabilitySummary JudgmentContract InterpretationEmergency Snow RemovalHeavy ConstructionHighway ConstructionScope of Arbitration ClauseDe Novo Review
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Thomson v. Brute Spring & Equipment, Inc.

Claimant, an employee of Brute Spring & Equipment, Inc., sustained injuries while trimming trees at the private residence of Howard Besecker, the company's owner. Besecker's homeowner's insurance company disclaimed coverage. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found the homeowner's insurer responsible, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, holding Brute Spring's workers' compensation carrier, One Beacon Insurance, liable. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed the Board's decision, concluding that the injury did not occur within the course of claimant's employment with Brute Spring. The court determined that the work performed exclusively benefited Besecker personally and was unrelated to Brute Spring's business operations, thus falling outside the scope of the carrier's policy.

Scope of EmploymentInsurance Coverage DisputeAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidencePersonal Benefit RuleEmployer LiabilityCarrier ResponsibilityTree Trimming AccidentWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionOff-premises Work
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rodriguez v. MODERN HANDLING EQUIPMENT OF NJ, INC.

Plaintiff Newton Rodriguez was injured while operating a forklift at his employer American Specialties, Inc. He subsequently sued Starlift Equipment Company, Inc., alleging negligence in the repair and maintenance of the forklift's brakes. Starlift moved for summary judgment, contending that the forklift it repaired was not the one involved in the accident. The court, presided over by District Judge McMahon, found that there was a genuine issue of material fact concerning the identity of the forklift and whether Starlift's actions, particularly its alleged negligent repairs, could be considered 'launching a force or instrument of harm' under New York law, thereby establishing a duty of care to Rodriguez. Consequently, the court denied Starlift's motion for summary judgment, ruling that these questions should be reserved for a jury.

Summary JudgmentForklift AccidentNegligenceDuty of CareThird-Party LiabilityMoch ExceptionMaterial Issue of FactExpert TestimonyHearsay ExceptionBusiness Records
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Catlin v. Orleans County Highway Department

Petitioner was discharged from his employment as a maintenance equipment operator for the Orleans County Highway Department after testing positive for marihuana during a random drug test. He initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, contending that the penalty was arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and that he was denied due process due to inadequate notice of the consequences of a positive drug test. The court rejected these contentions, finding that he had received mandatory training and notice regarding the drug policy. The court upheld the dismissal, concluding that the severe penalty was not disproportionate to the offense, especially given his duties operating heavy equipment near others and the public.

Drug TestingPublic EmploymentCivil Service LawCPLR Article 78Employment TerminationArbitrary and CapriciousDue ProcessPenalty ProportionalityOrleans CountyHeavy Equipment Operator
References
6
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 00714 [224 AD3d 1364]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 2024

Triest v. Nixon Equip. Servs., Inc.

Paul Triest, an employee, sustained injuries while unloading a loaner alignment jack from a van owned by Nixon Equipment Services, Inc. Triest initiated a Labor Law and common-law negligence action. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, determined that the Supreme Court correctly dismissed the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, as the incident did not involve an elevation-related risk under the statute. However, the court erred in dismissing the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, finding unresolved factual issues regarding Nixon Equipment Services, Inc.'s control over the work and whether Triest was a volunteer. Consequently, the order was modified to reinstate these two causes of action.

Labor Law §240(1)Labor Law §200Common-Law NegligenceSummary JudgmentWorkplace InjuryElevation-Related RiskControl of WorkVolunteer StatusAppellate ReviewPersonal Injury
References
18
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 01454
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 23, 2017

Sokolovic v. Throgs Neck Operating Co., Inc.

This case involves an appeal concerning hold harmless and indemnity agreements. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted Vision Healthcare Services' motion to enforce a hold harmless agreement and Throgs Neck Operating Company, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment on its contractual indemnity claim against Vision. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed these orders. The court held that the plaintiff was obligated to hold Vision harmless from Throgs Neck's indemnification claim due to a hold harmless agreement executed during settlement. It further clarified that a nurse provided by Vision to Throgs Neck remained Vision's general employee, thereby triggering Vision's contractual indemnity obligation, despite being considered a special employee of Throgs Neck for the purpose of Throgs Neck's liability to the plaintiff.

hold harmless agreementcontractual indemnityspecial employeegeneral employeestaffing agreementsettlement agreementsummary judgmentnegligenceagency liabilityappellate review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 12, 2004

Cordani v. Thompson & Johnson Equipment Co.

This case concerns cross appeals regarding a negligence and strict products liability action arising from a July 1998 forklift accident. The unnamed plaintiff was injured by a forklift manufactured by Clark Equipment Company and leased by Thompson & Johnson Equipment Company, Inc., while employed by third-party defendant DeCrescente Distributing Company. The plaintiff alleged the forklift was defectively designed due to the lack of a backup alarm. The Supreme Court initially denied the defendants' summary judgment motions. The appellate court, applying the three-factor test from *Scarangella v Thomas Built Buses*, determined that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a material issue of fact. The court found DeCrescente was knowledgeable about forklifts, aware of optional safety features, and in the best position to assess the need for such features in its specific operation. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, granted summary judgment to the defendants, and dismissed the complaint.

Product LiabilityNegligenceForklift AccidentSummary JudgmentScarangella FactorsOptional Safety FeaturesDuty to WarnWorkplace SafetyIndustrial EquipmentDefective Design
References
11
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 01980, 525411
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 22, 2018

Matter of Portlette v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth.

Claimant Oneshiua Portlette, a bus operator, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying her claim for benefits. Initially, her employer, Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority, paid benefits for injuries Portlette reported sustained in a bus accident. However, the employer later suspended payments and raised fraud concerns after video evidence contradicted Portlette's account of the incident and her injuries. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and subsequently the Board found that Portlette failed to prove a causally-related injury and made material misrepresentations. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding no error in the Board's consideration of the employer's evidence despite a lack of timely notice of controversy, and upholding the Board's resolution of conflicting medical opinions which supported that no causally-related injury occurred.

Workers' CompensationCausationFraudVideo EvidenceMedical OpinionNotice of ControversyPreclusionAppellate ReviewBus OperatorInjury Claim
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 07, 1985

Claim of Burt v. County of Chemung

The claimant's decedent, a heavy equipment operator for Chemung County Highway Department, was found dead on July 7, 1980, while operating a roller. An autopsy revealed severe coronary artery disease, and medical evidence indicated a myocardial infarction occurred at least six hours before his death. The medical findings concluded that the decedent's work effort was unrelated to his death. Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Board's determination, which is founded upon substantial evidence, was affirmed.

Workers' CompensationMyocardial InfarctionCoronary Artery DiseaseDeath BenefitsWork-Related InjuryMedical EvidenceAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceDecedentEmployer Liability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thrall v. Al Turner Excavating Contractor, Inc.

The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed decisions relating to the death of an obese 52-year-old heavy equipment operator. The decedent collapsed and died while operating machinery. Conflicting medical opinions were presented regarding the cause of death, with Dr. Redmond asserting work-related stress as a precipitating factor and Drs. Bohrod and Currie attributing it to natural causes. The Board concluded the accident occurred during employment and the section 21 presumption of the Workers' Compensation Law applied, which was not overcome by medical evidence suggesting natural causes. The Board's decisions on these medical questions were upheld.

Workers' Compensation LawSection 21 presumptionCoronary Artery DiseaseOccupational DeathCausation in Workers' CompensationMedical Testimony ConflictPresumption of Arising Out of EmploymentHeavy Equipment OperationBoard's Fact-Finding AuthorityAppellate Review
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 1,660 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