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
Jun 14, 2005

Claim of Horton v. Salt

Claimant appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that reduced penalties against the employer and its carrier for late benefit payments. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially assessed a penalty of 20% of the late payments plus six $300 assessments. The Board agreed on late payments but reduced the penalty to only one $300 assessment, interpreting Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 (1) (e) as allowing a single $300 assessment per "instance" of application. The Court found the Board's interpretation not irrational but noted its inconsistency with prior Board decisions on similar facts without providing an explanation. Consequently, the Court reversed the Board's decision and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationLate Payment PenaltiesStatutory InterpretationAdministrative LawAgency PrecedentArbitrary and CapriciousJudicial ReviewRemandWorkers' Compensation BoardEmployer Obligations
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Hart v. Pageprint/Dekalb

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that imposed a late payment penalty on an employer's carrier. The claimant, suffering from permanent partial disability due to bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, entered into a waiver agreement with the carrier for $35,200. Although the Board approved the agreement without a hearing, the carrier paid the claimant 20 days after approval, exceeding the 10-day limit, leading to a $7,040 penalty. The appellate court found the streamlined procedures used for approval invalid because they conflicted with 12 NYCRR 300.36, meaning the agreement was never properly approved and thus the 10-day limitations period for payment never commenced. Consequently, the penalty imposition was reversed, and the matter was remitted to the Board for a proper hearing on the agreement.

Workers' Compensation Law § 32Late Payment PenaltyWaiver AgreementBoard ApprovalStreamlined ProceduresAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewRemandWorkers' Compensation BoardOccupational Disease
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 01, 2002

Johnson v. Shelmar Corp.

Claimant suffered work-related injuries in 1993, leading to a settlement approved on September 12, 2001, under Workers’ Compensation Law § 32. The settlement funds were mailed on September 24, 2001. Claimant sought a 20% penalty, arguing the payment was late according to Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 (3) (f) and 12 NYCRR 300.36 (g), as it exceeded the 10-day period post-approval. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this penalty. However, the appellate court reversed the decision, applying General Construction Law § 25-a (1), which extends deadlines falling on a Saturday to the next business day, thus making the September 24th payment timely. The court also noted that the Board could have exercised discretion to waive the deadline due to the operational disruptions caused by the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.

Late Payment PenaltyWorkers' Compensation SettlementStatutory Deadline ExtensionGeneral Construction LawRule DiscretionSeptember 11 Attacks ImpactTimeliness of PaymentAdministrative HearingWorkers' Compensation BoardJudicial Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 1980

Claim of White v. New York City Housing Authority

This case concerns an appeal by the employer, New York City Housing Authority, and its carrier, the State Insurance Fund, from a Workers' Compensation Board decision filed March 21, 1980. The Board affirmed a penalty imposed on the carrier for failing to timely reimburse the employer for wages paid to a claimant. An earlier award, affirmed by the board on April 25, 1979, directed reimbursement to the Authority. The carrier's failure to pay within 10 days of the April 1979 decision, specifically by May 25, 1979, resulted in a 20% penalty under Workers' Compensation Law § 25 (subd 3, par [c]). The court affirmed the penalty, ruling that the statute is self-executing and applies even when the payment is to an employer for wages advanced, emphasizing the legislative intent to ensure prompt compensation.

Workers' Compensation LawPenalty AssessmentLate PaymentEmployer ReimbursementInsurance Carrier LiabilityStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewNew YorkWage CreditDisability Benefits
References
3
Case No. CV-23-2004
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Joseph Cabrera

Joseph Cabrera, the claimant, established a workers' compensation claim for work-related injuries in 2022 and was classified with a permanent partial disability. The self-insured employer, New York City Housing Authority, failed to make timely compensation payments, leading to a late payment penalty imposed by the Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ). Claimant's counsel sought fees for securing this penalty, but the WCLJ denied the application, a decision later affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The Board found that recent amendments to Workers' Compensation Law § 24 do not provide for additional counsel fees based on the assessment of a late payment penalty. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing prior precedent from Matter of Gonzalez v Northeast Parent & Child Socy., which established that counsel is not entitled to additional fees for securing late payment penalties.

Workers' Compensation LawCounsel FeesLate Payment PenaltyWorkers' Compensation Board AppealPermanent Partial DisabilityAppellate DivisionJudicial ReviewStatutory InterpretationSelf-Insured EmployerProcedural Error
References
4
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 00509 [234 AD3d 1235]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2025

Matter of Clifton v. Research Found. of SUNY

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying counsel fees related to a late payment penalty. Claimant Debra S. Clifton established a workers' compensation claim for work-related injuries and later settled it for a lump sum. When a portion of the settlement award was not timely paid, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge imposed a 20% penalty but denied counsel's application for fees incurred in securing the late payment penalty, citing Workers' Compensation Law § 24. The Board modified the decision by increasing the penalty amount but affirmed the denial of counsel fees. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding no basis to disturb the denial of counsel fees for late payment penalties, consistent with prior precedent.

Workers' Compensation LawCounsel FeesLate Payment PenaltyWorkers' Compensation BoardStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewPermanent Partial DisabilitySettlement AgreementWorkers' Compensation JudgeWorkers' Compensation Benefits
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Schell v. Right

A claimant was injured in April 1993, establishing accident, notice, and causal relationship. Compensation was stipulated at $225 per week for physical disability. Later, a consequential psychiatric condition was affirmed, setting a higher payment rate of $358.73 per week from 1994. The workers' compensation carrier failed to pay this higher rate retroactively after the August 9, 2000 determination. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge imposed a penalty under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 (3) (f) for this failure, but the Workers’ Compensation Board rescinded it due to a lack of sufficient evidence. The claimant appealed, arguing that the penalty provisions are self-executing and mandatory for late payments. The appellate court reversed the Board's decision, finding no substantial evidence to support the rescission, and remitted the matter for further proceedings, emphasizing the mandatory nature of the penalty for delayed award payments.

Workers' CompensationPenalty AssessmentLate PaymentRetroactive BenefitsPsychiatric DisabilityCarrier LiabilityMandatory PenaltyBoard ReversalAppellate ReviewRemand
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Keser v. New York State Elmira Psychiatric Center

This case addresses whether late payment penalty provisions of Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 (3) (f) apply to reimbursements made by an employer’s compensation carrier for wages paid during an employee's disability, and if so, whether they apply when reimbursement is in a form other than monetary payment to the employee. The Court affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, answering both questions in the affirmative. A 20% penalty was upheld against the State Insurance Fund for late reimbursement to the New York State Elmira Psychiatric Center, the employer of claimant Peter Keser. The ruling emphasizes that for penalty purposes, no distinction should be made between awards payable directly to claimants and those payable to an employer as reimbursement, and the mechanics of payment (e.g., accounting credit) do not alter the need for timely compliance with award terms, promoting prompt payment of workers' compensation benefits.

Workers' CompensationLate Payment PenaltyEmployer ReimbursementDisability BenefitsStatutory InterpretationSection 25(3)(f)Compensation DefinitionCarrier LiabilityPrompt PaymentAccrued Leave
References
6
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05129 [241 AD3d 1680]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 2025

Matter of Cabrera v. New York City Hous. Auth.

Joseph Cabrera, the claimant, established a workers' compensation claim for work-related injuries and was subsequently classified with a permanent partial disability. The self-insured employer, New York City Housing Authority, failed to make timely compensation payments, leading to the imposition of a late payment penalty under Workers' Compensation Law § 25 (1) (e). Claimant's counsel sought an award of counsel fees for their role in securing this penalty, but the application was denied by the Workers' Compensation Law Judge, a decision later affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The denial was based on recent amendments to Workers' Compensation Law § 24, which do not provide for additional fees for procuring late payment penalties. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, citing consistency with prior rulings that underscore the lack of authority to award such counsel fees.

counsel feeslate payment penaltyWorkers' Compensation Lawpermanent partial disabilityadministrative appealstatutory interpretationattorney fees denialjudicial reviewappellate decisionWorkers' Compensation Board
References
4
Case No. CV-23-2310
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Debra Clifton

Claimant Debra S. Clifton sought a late payment penalty for a workers' compensation settlement and requested counsel fees for her efforts in securing this penalty. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) imposed a penalty but denied the request for counsel fees, citing an amendment to Workers' Compensation Law § 24. The Workers' Compensation Board (Board) subsequently modified the penalty amount to $12,083.13 but upheld the denial of counsel fees. On appeal, the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, citing its precedent in *Matter of Gonzalez v Northeast Parent & Child Socy.* The core issue revolved around the compensability of counsel fees for late payment penalties under the amended Workers' Compensation Law § 24.

Counsel FeesLate Payment PenaltyWorkers' Compensation Law § 24Workers' Compensation Law § 32Permanent Partial DisabilitySettlement AgreementAppellate DivisionStatutory InterpretationAttorney FeesWorkers' Compensation Board Decision
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 3,448 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