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

Consolidated Flooring Corp. v. Environmental Control Board

The case involves a petitioner contractor found to have violated asbestos control program regulations by the Environmental Control Board. The violation stemmed from disturbing asbestos without proper containment and protection measures. The court reviewed the determination, confirming the Board's findings. Consequently, the petitioner's request was denied, and the related CPLR article 78 proceeding was dismissed. The court emphasized that asbestos abatement regulations apply even when the presence of asbestos is not initially suspected.

asbestos controlenvironmental regulation violationcontractor liabilitypublic health and safetyworker protectionadministrative determination reviewjudicial review of agency actionArticle 78 proceedingregulatory complianceasbestos abatement activities
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 22, 1989

Cantarino v. New York Zoological Society

This case involves an appeal from an order that granted the defendant's cross-motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. The plaintiffs sought to establish liability under the Scaffold Act (Labor Law § 240) against the defendant, alleging an ownership interest or control over a construction worksite at the Bronx Zoo's Elephant House. The court found that the defendant's beneficial interest in the construction, related to its role as owner and protector of animals and conservator of the park, did not translate into the requisite ownership or control for Scaffold Act liability. The defendant never exercised control over daily progress or safety practices at the worksite. Consequently, the judgment in favor of the defendant was unanimously affirmed.

Scaffold ActLabor LawWorksite ControlConstruction LiabilityBronx ZooAppellate AffirmationFailure to State a Cause of ActionPremises LiabilityWorkers' SafetySummary Judgment
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Chirino v. Sanitary Controls, Inc.

This case concerns appeals from Workers’ Compensation Board decisions that upheld the State Insurance Fund's cancellation of a workers’ compensation policy for Sanitary Controls, Inc. due to nonpayment. The Fund sent a cancellation notice on November 23, 1976, effective December 11, 1976. Sanitary received it eight days before the effective date. Concurrently, Sanitary filed for bankruptcy, and a court order stayed proceedings against it but did not explicitly stop the policy cancellation. The appeals court affirmed the Board’s decision, holding that service of cancellation is effective upon mailing, not receipt, as per Workers’ Compensation Law § 54, subd 5, and that the bankruptcy filing did not negate Sanitary’s insurance obligations.

Policy CancellationNonpayment of PremiumBankruptcy LawService of NoticeInsurance LiabilityAppellate ProcedureStatutory InterpretationEmployer ObligationsInsurer ObligationsBoard Decisions
References
4
Case No. 034765412M
Regular Panel Decision

McAtee v. Environmental Control Board of the Department of Environmental Protection

The petitioner, Darin E McAtee, sought to annul a New York City Environmental Control Board (ECB) determination that found him in violation of Administrative Code § 28-404.1 and imposed a $4,800 fine. The violation stemmed from a window washing company hired by McAtee, whose worker lacked a rigger's license. McAtee argued that the Administrative Code section was vague as applied to nonsupervisory homeowners and that New York Labor Law preempted local laws regarding window washers. The court found that the ECB's interpretation of the statute had no rational basis, as the code's language did not apply to homeowners who neither hoisted nor supervised the work. Consequently, the court granted McAtee's petition, annulled the ECB's determination, and dismissed the notice of violation.

Workers' CompensationAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewStatutory InterpretationHomeowner LiabilityBuilding CodesRigger LicenseDue ProcessPreemptionNew York City
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Control Network Communications, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Plaintiff Control Network Communications, Inc. (CNC) initiated an action against defendant International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 236, alleging breach of contract and fraud under the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA). CNC contended that Local 236 violated a 'most favored nations' clause in their collective bargaining agreement by offering more favorable terms to another employer, Adirondack Cabling. CNC's grievance was ultimately denied by the Labor Management Committee (LMC). The court granted Local 236's motion to dismiss, finding the LMC's decision on the breach of contract claim to be final and binding due to CNC's failure to timely petition for vacation. Additionally, the court ruled that CNC's fraud claim was preempted by the LMRA, as its resolution required interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement.

Breach of contractFraud claimLabor Management Relations Act (LMRA)Most favored nations clauseCollective bargaining agreement (CBA)Grievance procedureMotion to dismissFederal preemptionLabor Management Committee (LMC)Final and binding determination
References
20
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 02281
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 26, 2019

Matter of Whiting-Turner Contr. Co. v. Environmental Control Bd. of the City of N.Y.

The Appellate Division, First Department, confirmed a determination by the Environmental Control Board of the City of New York, which found Whiting-Turner Contracting Company in violation of New York City Building Code § BC 3301.2 and imposed a penalty of $2,400. The court found substantial evidence to support the Board's determination that Whiting-Turner was the general contractor and thus responsible for safety measures at a mall construction site, where a worker was injured. The court also upheld the Board's limitation of administrative appellate review to the record established before the hearing officer, as petitioner failed to show good cause for admitting new records after the hearing.

Building Code ViolationGeneral Contractor LiabilityConstruction Site SafetyAdministrative ReviewCPLR Article 78Appellate DivisionEnvironmental Control BoardWork PermitSubstantial EvidenceRecord Review
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 2004

Vogt v. Greenmarine Holding, LLC

This action was brought under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act by former employees of Outboard Marine Corporation (OMC), a bankrupt company, against several investment companies that owned or controlled OMC's stock. Plaintiffs alleged failure to provide a sixty-day notice before mass layoffs or plant closings. Defendants filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The court applied the Department of Labor's five-factor test for intercorporate WARN Act liability, particularly emphasizing de facto control over the mass layoff decision. The motions to dismiss were denied for Greenmarine Holdings, LLC, Quantum Industrial Partners, LDC, and Quantum Industrial Holdings, Ltd., due to sufficient allegations of de facto control, common ownership, and shared directors. However, the motions were granted for other defendants lacking such specific allegations.

WARN ActMass LayoffPlant ClosingIntercorporate LiabilityParent CompanySubsidiaryIntegrated EnterpriseDepartment of Labor RegulationsMotion to DismissRule 12(b)(6)
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ibarra v. Equipment Control, Inc.

Roman Ibarra, an employee of Atlantic Waste Disposal, Inc., was injured by a bailing machine and subsequently filed a workers' compensation claim. He then commenced a negligence and product liability action against the manufacturer, Equipment Control, Inc. Equipment Control, Inc. initiated a third-party action for contribution and indemnification against Atlantic and Empire State Recycling Corporation. Atlantic moved for summary judgment, asserting that the 1996 amendment to Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 restricted its liability for contribution to cases involving a 'grave injury,' which it argued Ibarra had not sustained. The Supreme Court denied Atlantic's motion, but the appellate court reversed, finding the amended statute applicable, placing the burden of proving 'grave injury' on the third party, and concluding that Ibarra's loss of vision in one eye did not meet the statutory definition of a 'grave injury.' Consequently, all claims and cross claims against Atlantic were dismissed.

Workers' Compensation LawContribution and IndemnificationGrave InjuryStatutory InterpretationProspective ApplicationSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewThird-Party ClaimsEmployer LiabilityPersonal Injury
References
12
Case No. ADJ3425275 (VNO0499477)
Regular
Oct 18, 2018

KAREN JACOBSEN vs. KRISTIN MULHALL, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by AIG

This case concerns a medical treatment lien filed before January 1, 2013, by the Long Beach Pain Center. The defendant argued the lien should be dismissed for failure to timely file a sworn declaration under Labor Code section 4903.8(d) and for alleged ownership by a "suspended provider." The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding the declaration defect curable and the defendant failed to prove ownership/control under section 139.21. However, the Board noted the untimeliness of the declaration and directed the WCJ to consider sanctions.

RemittiturPetition for Writ of ReviewPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Findings of Fact and OrdersLien ClaimantMedical Treatment LienLabor Code Section 4903.8(d)Sworn DeclarationDismissed by Operation of LawLabor Code Section 139.21
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Era Steel Construction Corp. v. Egan

A petitioner challenged the Office of General Services' (OGS) denial of its certification as a women-owned business enterprise (WBE) under Executive Order No. 21. The OGS had denied certification, citing the petitioner's alleged lack of operational control and technical expertise inconsistent with industry practice in steel erection. The court found that OGS's determination lacked a rational basis and was arbitrary and capricious, having disregarded its own guidelines for assessing bona fide ownership and control. The court also noted OGS's failure to adhere to prescribed methods for identifying industry practices. Consequently, the court annulled the OGS determination and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Women-owned Business Enterprise (WBE)Certification DenialAdministrative LawCPLR Article 78 ProceedingArbitrary and CapriciousRational Basis ReviewExecutive Order No. 21Office of General Services (OGS)Operational ControlIndustry Practice
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 1,604 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