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

Tishman Construction Corp. v. Arc Electrical Construction Co.

This case concerns a declaratory judgment action brought by Morgan Trust Company and Tishman Construction Corporation (plaintiffs) against Northbrook Property & Casualty Insurance Company (defendant). Plaintiffs sought a declaration that Northbrook was obligated to defend and indemnify them in an underlying action involving an injured worker, Joseph Hickey, who fell on a construction site. The initial motion for summary judgment by plaintiffs was denied by the IAS Court. However, the appellate court unanimously reversed this decision, granting summary judgment to the plaintiffs. The court determined that prior rulings based on res judicata established Northbrook's obligation, and that a late notice of claim argument by Northbrook lacked merit. Consequently, Northbrook was declared obligated to defend and indemnify the plaintiffs.

Summary judgmentDeclaratory judgmentInsurance obligationIndemnificationAdditional insuredRes judicataLate notice of claimAppellate reviewConstruction accidentContract law
References
4
Case No. ADJ739750 (FRE 0217695) ADJ3422922 (FRE 0217696) ADJ4620151 (FRE 0217213)
Regular
Sep 23, 2010

JERRY P. WILLIAMS vs. GOLDEN STATE VINTNERS and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) initially issued a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions against State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) for failing to provide a computer printout of benefits. SCIF objected, asserting the printout was available at a prior Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) with a former attorney. Although the printout was not explicitly mentioned in the MSC pre-trial statement or offered at trial, the WCAB accepted SCIF's representation of its availability. Consequently, finding no willful failure to comply with a regulatory obligation, the WCAB dismissed the Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNotice of Intention To Impose SanctionsWCAB Rule 10607computer printout of benefitsMandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)Declaration of Desiree A. Mercadopre-trial conference statementproposed exhibitsEAMSwillful failure to comply
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2008

QBE Insurance v. D. Gangi Contracting Corp.

The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, affirmed an order declaring that plaintiff insurer QBE was not obligated to defend or indemnify defendant general contractor Gangi in a personal injury action. The court found that QBE properly disclaimed coverage due to Gangi's late notice of the underlying accident, which occurred three years prior. Gangi's president, who had contemporaneous knowledge of the worker D’Ambrosi’s severe injuries, failed to promptly notify QBE. The court ruled that the president's knowledge was imputed to Gangi, triggering its duty to notify, and rejected Gangi's excuse of a good faith belief of nonliability given the severity of the injuries and potential Labor Law strict liability. QBE’s subsequent disclaimer was deemed timely, and effective against D'Ambrosi’s counsel despite not specifically addressing D'Ambrosi’s own notice failure.

Insurance DisclaimerLate NoticeGeneral ContractorWorker InjuryImputed KnowledgeCorporate OfficerPolicy BreachSummary JudgmentAppellate AffirmationNew York Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Moore v. Eagle Sanitation, Inc.

Plaintiffs Kevin Moore and Roger Snyder filed a lawsuit against Eagle Sanitation Inc. and Michael Reali, seeking unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law. They moved for conditional certification as an FLSA collective action, production of contact information for potential class members from April 2005 to April 2011, and court authorization to circulate a Notice of Pendency. The court, presided over by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson, granted the motion for conditional certification, finding that the plaintiffs met the lenient evidentiary standard required at this stage. Additionally, the court granted the request for defendants to produce contact information for a six-year period to account for state law claims, emphasizing judicial economy. The court also authorized the dissemination of the proposed notice, with minor modifications regarding the inclusion of defense counsel's contact details and clarification on potential costs and discovery obligations for opt-in plaintiffs.

FLSACollective ActionOvertime CompensationNew York Labor LawConditional CertificationNotice of PendencyStatute of LimitationsDiscovery of Class MembersWage and Hour DisputeEmployment Law
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Government Employees Insurance v. Kolodny

Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) initiated a declaratory judgment action to determine if it was obligated to indemnify Chaim S. Kolodny or provide coverage for claims stemming from a fatal 1990 automobile accident. GEICO argued a policy exclusion applied because the vehicle was for Kolodny's regular use. The Supreme Court initially granted GEICO's motion for summary judgment. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, ruling that GEICO's disclaimer, issued over a year after receiving notice of the accident, was untimely and lacked an adequate explanation for the delay. Consequently, GEICO was found to be obligated to provide coverage. The appeal from the intermediate order was dismissed.

Insurance CoverageAutomobile AccidentDeclaratory JudgmentTimely DisclaimerPolicy ExclusionSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewEstate AdministrationIndemnificationRegular Use Clause
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

23-08-18 Jackson Realty Associates v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

The plaintiffs, owners of premises in Queens, hired Integrity Construction and Consulting Services (Integrity) for renovation work, with Integrity obligated to name them as additional insureds under its liability policy with Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (Nationwide). Following injuries to two workers, Richard Sheehan and David Crosby, and subsequent lawsuits, Nationwide disclaimed coverage for the plaintiffs, citing untimely notice of the occurrence and claims. The plaintiffs initiated this action seeking a declaration of Nationwide's obligation to defend and indemnify them. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment concerning Sheehan's lawsuit, finding a failure to demonstrate timely notice. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding the plaintiffs did not establish a prima facie case of being united in interest with Integrity or of providing timely, independent notice.

InsuranceLiabilityNoticeDeclaratory JudgmentAdditional InsuredAppealSummary JudgmentDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyOccurrence
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2007

Sorbara Construction Corp. v. AIU Insurance

This case involves an insured plaintiff's appeal regarding a delay in notifying their excess insurer about an employee's accident and subsequent personal injury lawsuit. The plaintiff failed to notify the defendant excess insurer for approximately 5 1/2 years. The Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted the defendant insurer's cross-motion, thereby absolving the insurer of any obligation to defend or indemnify the plaintiff. The appellate court affirmed this decision, emphasizing that timely notice is a condition precedent for liability insurance policies and an insured's good-faith belief in non-liability requires a prior inquiry into potential liability. Furthermore, the court clarified that an insurer's knowledge from other sources or notice under a workers' compensation policy does not fulfill the insured's obligation to provide direct notice under a liability policy.

Liability insuranceTimely noticeCondition precedentSummary judgmentPersonal injuryExcess insurerNon-complianceGood-faith beliefNon-liabilityWorkers' Compensation
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

National Union Fire Insurance v. Great American E&S Insurance

Plaintiff Ethical Culture Fieldston School (ECF) and Tishman, the project manager, were named additional insureds on Solar's general liability policy with Great American. Solar employee, Lisa Best, was injured on site. While Solar filed workers' compensation, notice to Great American about Best's personal injury lawsuit against Tishman and ECF, and Solar's subsequent impleading, was delayed. Tishman and ECF sought a declaratory judgment that Great American was obligated to defend and indemnify them, and Solar cross-claimed. Great American moved for summary judgment, asserting untimely notice. The court found Solar's delay of over a year in notifying Great American was untimely and that Solar's belief of nonliability was unreasonable, especially given its contractual indemnification obligations. Consequently, Great American was not obligated to provide coverage to Solar in the underlying action.

Insurance Coverage DisputeTimely Notice RequirementCondition PrecedentDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifySummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityContractual IndemnificationAdditional Insured StatusConstruction Site Injury
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Quevedo v. City of New York

Plaintiff Raphael A. Quevedo, an employee of Berley Industries, Inc., was injured by a boiler explosion in a building owned by the City of New York. Quevedo sued the City and V and A Oil Burner Services, Inc., alleging negligence. The City subsequently commenced a third-party action for contractual indemnification against Berley Industries, Inc., based on a clause in their maintenance contract. Berley argued the indemnification clause was void under General Obligations Law § 5-322.1 and that the City's notice to the insurer was untimely. The Supreme Court and Appellate Division both affirmed the enforceability of the clause. This court affirmed, clarifying that General Obligations Law § 5-322.1 only voids clauses indemnifying for *sole* negligence, and since no sole negligence was proven, the clause remained enforceable to the extent it covered joint fault. The court also rejected the untimely notice argument, citing the contract's provision that notice by either party was sufficient.

Indemnification clauseBuilding maintenance contractContractual liabilityGeneral Obligations LawSole negligenceJoint faultInsurance coverageThird-party actionSettlementAppellate review
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 1987

Universal Underwriters Insurance v. Patriot Ambulette, Inc.

The plaintiff, an unnamed insurance carrier, appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, which mandated it to defend and indemnify the defendant, Patriot Ambulette, Inc., in a personal injury lawsuit filed by Edward Camarero. The core issue revolved around the defendant's delayed notification of an accident to the plaintiff, attributed to an insurance broker's error. Despite a policy clause requiring notice "as soon as practicable," the court found the five-month delay not unreasonable under the circumstances, noting the plaintiff's failure to produce a key witness. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the judgment, obligating the plaintiff to fulfill its duties under the insurance policy.

Insurance ContractDeclaratory JudgmentNotice of AccidentDelayed NoticeDuty to DefendDuty to IndemnifyInsurance Broker ErrorReasonableness of NoticeAppellate ReviewPersonal Injury Action
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 3,905 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