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. 2021 NY Slip Op 01018 [191 AD3d 548]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 16, 2021

Matter of Tenants United Fighting for the Lower E. Side v. City of New York Dept. of City Planning

The Appellate Division reversed a lower court order that had annulled approvals by the New York City Planning Commission (CPC) for new building constructions. The Supreme Court had initially granted petitions from Tenants United Fighting for the Lower East Side and Lower East Side Organized Neighbors. The appellate court held that the Supreme Court should have deferred to the CPC's reasonable interpretation of the New York City Zoning Resolution (ZR). Specifically, the Appellate Division clarified that ZR § 78-043's requirement for findings as a condition precedent only applies to modifications granted by special permit or authorization, not to other types of modifications to large-scale residential developments. Consequently, the petitions were denied and the proceedings dismissed.

Zoning ResolutionLarge-Scale Residential DevelopmentCity Planning CommissionAdministrative LawAppellate ReviewJudicial DeferenceStatutory InterpretationArticle 78 ProceedingNYC ZoningUrban Planning
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 04, 1995

Claim of Diliberto v. Hickory Farms, Inc.

The claimant was injured at work on December 30, 1987, sustaining injuries to his neck, shoulder blade, and left arm, with findings later expanded to include the lower back. The employer and its insurer disputed the causal relationship of the lower back injury. Although a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found the lower back injury causally related, the Workers’ Compensation Board ultimately disallowed this claim due to a lack of credible medical evidence. The Board's decision was affirmed on appeal, as it was within the Board's authority to resolve conflicting expert medical testimony. Supporting the Board's finding, medical experts indicated no causal link, and the claimant did not report lower back pain until 16 months post-accident.

Causality DisputeMedical Expert TestimonyBoard DiscretionAffirmationLower Back PainDelayed SymptomsInjured WorkerEmployer LiabilityInsurance DisputeAppellate Division
References
3
Case No. 527925
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 25, 2019

Matter of Smith v. Rochester-Genesee Regional Transp. Auth.

Claimant George I. Smith appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision from November 15, 2017. The Board ruled that Smith's lower back injury was not a consequential causally-related injury to his initial work-related right foot and consequential left knee injuries from February 2012. Additionally, the Board found that Smith violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a by failing to disclose his complete medical history regarding a prior lower back injury from a 2000 motor vehicle accident. The WCLJ and subsequently the Board denied Smith's request to amend his claim for the lower back injury and imposed penalties, rescinding and disqualifying him from future indemnity benefits. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported both the lack of causal relationship for the back injury and the § 114-a violation due to Smith's false representations and omissions.

Workers' Compensation Law § 114-aFraudulent MisrepresentationCausally Related InjuryLower Back InjuryIndependent Medical ExaminationPrior Medical HistoryIndemnity BenefitsAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceCredibility Determination
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 1999

Claim of Sons-Brown v. Oas Hills Dining Hall

Claimant sustained work-related lower back injuries in 1993 and 1994, for which she received workers' compensation benefits. After a non-work-related neck injury in a 1995 car accident, she stopped working. In 1998, her compensation cases were reopened to authorize surgery for her work-related back condition and address further lost time. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge authorized the surgery and awarded benefits, apportioning them 50% to each prior work-related injury. The employer's workers' compensation carrier appealed, arguing the claimant withdrew from the labor market solely due to the noncompensable car accident. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the award, finding evidence that the neck injury had resolved while the work-related lower back problems continued to solely impact her ability to return to the labor market. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding there was ample support in the record for the Board’s findings.

Workers' CompensationDisability BenefitsCausationApportionment of LiabilityLower Back InjuryNeck InjuryNon-Work-Related InjuryReopened CaseSurgery AuthorizationLabor Market Withdrawal
References
1
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 02252 [195 AD3d 40]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 13, 2021

Matter of Part 60 RMBS Put - Back Litig.

This case addresses contractual disputes arising from the pooling and securitization of residential mortgages (RMBS). Computershare Trust Company, National Association, acting as a Separate Securities Administrator, sued Natixis Real Estate Holdings LLC (and its predecessor) for breaching a Pooling and Servicing Agreement (PSA) by failing to identify and repurchase nonconforming mortgages. Natixis, in turn, filed counterclaims and a third-party complaint against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (the Securities Administrator and Master Servicer), alleging Wells Fargo breached its PSA duties to notify of breaches and supervise the Servicer. The Appellate Division ruled that Natixis's statute of limitations defense, based on the borrowing statute (CPLR 202), was not waived, overturning the lower court's decision on this point. It affirmed the dismissal of Natixis's contractual indemnification claim against Wells Fargo but allowed Natixis's independent breach of contract claims (failure to notify and failure to supervise) against Wells Fargo to proceed.

RMBSPut-Back LitigationContractual ObligationsStatute of LimitationsBorrowing StatuteLaw of the CaseWaiverIndemnificationBreach of ContractSecurities Administrator
References
35
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 04679
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 26, 2018

Borst v. Lower Manhattan Dev. Corp.

This consolidated appeal concerns a fire at the former Deutsche Bank building in Lower Manhattan, where plaintiffs sought punitive damages against Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc. and Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. (Bovis), the general contractor. The fire, which injured over a hundred firefighters and killed two, was exacerbated by wooden barriers obstructing stairwells and a non-operational water standpipe system. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's denial of Bovis's summary judgment motions, finding that a jury could reasonably conclude Bovis's site safety manager's failure to ensure standpipe readiness and enforce a no-smoking policy constituted wilful and wanton disregard for public safety. Furthermore, the court noted an issue of fact regarding whether Bovis's management was aware of the manager's incompetence but deliberately retained him, potentially establishing corporate liability for punitive damages.

Punitive damagesSummary judgmentWilful and wanton disregardCorporate liabilityStandpipe systemFire safetyDemolition projectGeneral contractorEmployee incompetenceRatification
References
7
Case No. ADJ9785796
Regular
Oct 14, 2019

Victor Gonzalez vs. CITY OF TORRANCE

This case involves applicant Victor Gonzalez's petition for reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding industrial injury to his back and left lower extremity, but not his psyche or in the form of stroke. The Board granted reconsideration, finding that the neurological evaluator applied an incorrect legal standard to the stroke claim and that Dr. Silver's deposition testimony was improperly excluded. Consequently, the Board amended the decision to preserve the findings of injury to the back and left lower extremity and denied injury to the psyche, while deferring the stroke and permanent disability issues for further development of the record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVictor GonzalezCity of Torrancebus operatorindustrial injuryback injuryleft lower extremitystrokepsycheDr. Lee Silver
References
1
Case No. WCB No. G076 2707
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 09, 2021

Matter of Duncan v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

This Board Panel Decision concerns an appeal by the applicant, Joseph Lafayette, regarding a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's (WCLJ) finding on the causal relationship of his back injury. The applicant sustained injuries to his back, neck, and shoulder during his employment. The WCLJ had previously established a causal relationship for the neck and shoulder injuries but disallowed the claim for the back injury. Upon review, the Board Panel determined that the medical evidence in the record supports a causal relationship between the claimant's employment and his lower back injury. As a result, the Panel modified the WCLJ's decision to establish a causal relationship for the back injury, while affirming the other aspects of the original decision.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryNeck InjuryShoulder InjuryCausal RelationshipMedical EvidencePanel ReviewWCLJ DecisionModificationAppeal
References
2
Case No. ADJ9312112
Regular
Apr 17, 2017

CUONG PHAN vs. CITY OF SANTA CLARA

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant City of Santa Clara's petition for reconsideration. The Board upheld a prior finding that applicant Cuong Phan sustained industrial injuries to his lower back, resulting in 29% permanent disability. The key issue was the application of the "duty belt presumption" under Labor Code section 3213.2, which presumes lower back impairments in long-term peace officers required to wear duty belts arise from employment. The Board found the presumption applicable and not rebutted, deeming it a legislative intent to protect officers with these specific conditions.

Duty belt presumptionLabor Code section 3213.2police officerlower back impairmentpeace officerpermanent disabilityjoint findings and awardpetition for reconsiderationBenson apportionmentLabor Code section 4663(e)
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Mallette v. Flattery's

A claimant, who had a preexisting lower back condition and had been recommended for artificial disc replacement surgery (ADRE), suffered further lower back injuries in a work accident in 2010. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially apportioned liability for the ADRE equally between the preexisting condition and the work accident. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board modified this, finding the employer's carrier solely liable for the surgery. The carrier appealed, arguing a lack of causal relationship between the accident and the need for ADRE. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that the work accident aggravated the claimant's preexisting condition, making the need for ADRE causally related to the accident.

workers' compensationcausal relationshipaggravation of preexisting conditionartificial disc replacement surgerylower back injuryapportionmentmedical authorizationsubstantial evidenceBoard determinationAppellate Division decision
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 3,540 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