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

Hull-Hazard, Inc. v. Roberts

Justice Levine dissents from the majority's decision, which annulled the respondent's determination that held Hull Corporation jointly liable with Hull-Hazard, Inc., for violations of Labor Law § 220. Levine argues for a liberal construction of Labor Law § 220, citing its remedial and protective purposes for workers' rights. He emphasizes the extensively interlocking relationship between Hull Corporation and Hull-Hazard, Inc., highlighting shared ownership, officers, managerial staff, and employee benefit plans. According to Levine, Hull Corporation, as a successor employer, should not be permitted to evade liability given its clear knowledge and use of Hull-Hazard's resources, drawing parallels to federal labor law on successor liability. He concludes that the imposition of joint liability was rational and should have been confirmed. The overall determination was modified by annulling the finding of a willful violation of Labor Law § 220 (2) and the joint liability of Hull Corporation, and then confirmed as modified.

Joint LiabilitySuccessor EmployerLabor Law ViolationsCorporate InterlockingDissenting OpinionConcurring OpinionRemedial LegislationUnfair Labor PracticesAnnulment of DeterminationWillful Violation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cariffe v. P/R Hoegh Cairn & M/V Cairn

Plaintiff Frank Cariffe, a longshoreman, was injured by inhaling hazardous Metanil Yellow while unloading drums from a container at Brooklyn Pier #9. The defendant, M/V Hoegh Cairn (CAIRN), was aware of the hazardous nature of the cargo but allegedly failed to label the container or provide a dangerous cargo manifest to Cariffe's employer, Universal Maritime Service Stevedoring Company (UMS). CAIRN moved for summary judgment, arguing it had no duty to warn because Metanil Yellow was not on the official Hazardous Materials Table at the time of the incident, only on an optional list. The court denied CAIRN's motion, asserting that a shipowner retains a common law duty to warn stevedores of known hidden dangers, even if not specifically mandated by federal regulations for all substances. The court determined that whether CAIRN breached its duty of reasonable care and whether UMS had adequate knowledge or could have discovered the hazard by reasonable care are questions for the trier of fact.

Longshoreman InjuryHazardous CargoDuty to WarnShipowner LiabilitySummary Judgment DenialMetanil YellowMaritime LawFederal RegulationsStevedore ResponsibilityHidden Danger
References
10
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 03795 [161 AD3d 1478]
Regular Panel Decision
May 24, 2018

Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Ettelson)

Julie Ann Ettelson, now known as Julie A. Laczkowski, was suspended from practicing law in 2009 due to noncompliance with attorney registration requirements under Judiciary Law § 468-a. She filed a motion for reinstatement in April 2018, which was reviewed by the Attorney Grievance Committee. The Committee provided findings and deferred to the Court's discretion. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found that the respondent met all requirements for reinstatement, including completing the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination, maintaining current registration, and demonstrating good character and fitness. The Court also determined that her reinstatement would serve the public interest. Consequently, the Court granted her motion and reinstated her as an attorney.

Attorney ReinstatementProfessional MisconductJudiciary LawAttorney Grievance CommitteeAppellate DivisionAttorney RegistrationDisciplinary ProceedingsLegal EthicsSuspension of AttorneyCharacter and Fitness
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bellomo v. United Arab Shipping Co.(SAG)

Plaintiff Filippo Bellomo, a longshore worker, filed a lawsuit under the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act against United Arab Shipping Company. He claimed injuries to his right shoulder and elbow after falling on a sheet of ice hidden beneath snow on the deck of the M/V ALWATTYAH, owned by the defendant. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing there was no dangerous condition at the time of turnover or that any ice was an obvious hazard. The Court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the ice was present at turnover and if it constituted a latent hazard that the shipowner knew or should have known about.

Longshore and Harbor Workers ActSummary Judgment MotionShipowner NegligenceDuty of CareLatent HazardMaritime Personal InjurySlip and FallMaterial Fact DisputeFederal Court ProcedureStevedoring Operations
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rawlins v. United States

Longshoreman Timothy Rawlins sustained a severe left knee injury after slipping on an oily and wet deck aboard the CAPE VINCENT, a vessel owned by the United States government. Rawlins sued the United States for negligence, asserting that the vessel owner failed to maintain a safe working environment. The court found the United States and its crew 80% negligent for not addressing the known hazardous conditions, as they retained active control over the loading operations. Rawlins was assigned 20% comparative negligence for stepping into the known slippery area while avoiding a moving vehicle. Ultimately, the court awarded Rawlins $428,089.83 in damages from the United States, after accounting for comparative negligence and reimbursing his employer's compensation lien.

Maritime LawAdmiralty LawLongshoreman InjuryVessel Owner NegligenceComparative NegligenceUnsafe Working ConditionsSlippery DeckPublic Vessels ActSuits in Admiralty ActLHWCA
References
9
Case No. 01-22-00052-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 23, 2024

Aggreko, LLC v. Bronxcare Health System, Formerly Known as the Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center

An employee of Aggreko, LLC was fatally injured on Bronxcare Health System (BLH) premises, leading to the employee's heirs suing BLH in New York. BLH filed third-party claims against Aggreko, which sought to enforce a forum-selection clause requiring litigation in Harris County, Texas, but New York courts denied its motion. After settling the New York lawsuit, Aggreko sued BLH in Texas for indemnification, alleging BLH accepted its Terms and Conditions. The Texas trial court granted BLH's special appearance and dismissed Aggreko's suit for lack of personal jurisdiction. The appellate court affirmed, concluding Aggreko failed to prove a valid forum-selection clause applied, as BLH never objectively agreed to its terms.

Contract DisputeForum-Selection ClausePersonal JurisdictionSpecial AppearanceOffer and AcceptanceCounterofferRatificationEstoppelAgency AuthorityTexas Law
References
27
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 06114 [142 AD3d 854]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 22, 2016

Grossman v. TCR

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the denial of the defendant's motion for summary judgment in a slip and fall case. Plaintiff Richard Grossman alleged he slipped on water on the tile floor of defendant TCR's men's locker room. The court found that it could not be determined as a matter of law whether a hazardous condition was created by the water or if the defendant had actual or constructive notice. The majority distinguished the case from precedents where water was deemed 'necessarily incidental' due to direct proximity to pools or showers, noting evidence suggested a potentially defective condition and the possibility of constructive notice due to inadequate mopping practices and the use of towels. A dissenting opinion argued that the water was necessarily incidental to the locker room's use, citing the presence of a floor drain and the plaintiff's own awareness of frequent wetness in the area, thus advocating for summary judgment in favor of the defendant.

Slip and FallPremises LiabilityNegligenceSummary JudgmentConstructive NoticeHazardous ConditionLocker RoomFitness ClubAppellate ReviewDissenting Opinion
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Abax Services Corp. v. Local 78 Asbestos, Lead & Hazardous Waste Laborers

The defendants, Local 78 Asbestos, Lead and Hazardous Waste Laborers, AFL-CIO and Sal Speziale, appealed an order denying their motion to dismiss certain causes of action. The appellate court found that the plaintiff's claims were not preempted by Federal law, thus affirming the denial of dismissal on that ground. However, the court determined that the third cause of action, based on an alleged Donnelly Act violation, failed to properly identify co-conspirators. Consequently, this specific cause of action was dismissed, with leave for the plaintiff to replead. The order was modified and affirmed.

Tortious Interference with ContractDonnelly ActFederal PreemptionMotion to DismissLeave to RepleadAppellate ReviewLabor LawCivil ProcedurePleading RequirementsCo-Conspirators
References
3
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 03582 [184 AD3d 1057]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 25, 2020

Stewart v. ALCOA, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from an order denying defendants' motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action. Plaintiff, David Stewart, was injured in December 2012 while working on property owned by ALCOA, Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6). Defendants argued that a storm in progress caused the fall and that plaintiff was injured by the same condition he was directed to remove. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's denial of summary judgment, finding triable issues of fact regarding whether the fall was due to old ice versus a storm in progress, and whether plaintiff was specifically tasked with removing the hazardous condition. The court also held that the accident occurred in a "floor, passageway [or] walkway" within the meaning of 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d).

Personal InjuryLabor Law ViolationsSummary Judgment MotionPremises LiabilitySafe Workplace DutyStorm in Progress DoctrineIce and Snow HazardsConstruction Site SafetyTriable Issue of FactAppellate Review
References
24
Case No. 03-15-00064-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 22, 2015

Elite Auto Body LLC, D/B/A Precision Auto Body Rey R. Hernandez Yesica Diaz And David Damian v. Autocraft Body Works, Inc., Now Known as Wasson Road Ventures, Inc. D/B/A Autocraft Bodywerks

The Appellants, Elite Auto Body LLC, Rey R. Hernandez, Yesica Diaz, and David Damian, are appealing a trial court's order that denied their Motion to Dismiss. This motion was filed under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) against claims of trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition, and breach of fiduciary duty brought by Appellee Autocraft Bodywerks, Inc. Appellants contend that the trial court erred by narrowly construing the TCPA, failing to recognize that their communications regarding business practices and employee recruitment are protected under rights of association and free speech. They also argue that Autocraft failed to provide sufficient 'clear and specific evidence' to establish a prima facie case for its claims, which is a requirement under the TCPA. Consequently, Appellants are seeking a reversal of the trial court's order, dismissal of Autocraft's claims, and an award for their attorneys' fees and expenses.

Texas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeTexas Citizens Participation ActAnti-SLAPPTrade Secret MisappropriationUnfair CompetitionFiduciary DutyFreedom of AssociationFreedom of SpeechAppellate ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
References
42
Showing 1-10 of 999 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