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. SFO 0444182 SFO 0470385
Regular
Nov 16, 2007

MARK CRUZ vs. WESTLAKE AUTO SERVICE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for RELIANCE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, by INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and found the State Compensation Insurance Fund liable for 4% of pre-liquidation benefits paid by Reliance and 100% of post-liquidation benefits paid by CIGA. The Board clarified that "workers' compensation benefit payments" encompass temporary disability, permanent disability, and medical treatment but specifically exclude administrative costs such as medical management, copying, and bill review. Therefore, the State Fund is not obligated to reimburse CIGA for these administrative expenses.

CIGAReliance National Insurance CompanyState Compensation Insurance Fundcontributionpermanent disabilitymedical treatmentcumulative traumaspecific injurypre-liquidation paymentspost-liquidation payments
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hansen v. Post

The petitioner, a child protective worker, sought custody of Christopher Post, whose parents, Rose and William Post, had a documented history of child abuse and neglect, leading to the removal of seven other children from their care. Christopher had also been involved in two prior neglect proceedings. The parents exhibited severe deficiencies in parenting skills, an inability to address Christopher's emotional disturbances, and a history of rejecting assistance. After voluntarily placing Christopher with the petitioner, who became his psychological parent, they abruptly cut off contact. The Family Court found extraordinary circumstances, justified judicial intervention, and granted custody to the petitioner, a decision which the appellate court subsequently affirmed.

Custody DisputeParental UnfitnessChild NeglectExtraordinary CircumstancesFamily Court Act Article 6Child Protective ServicesAppealParental RightsPsychological ParentEmotional Disturbance
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

PMA MANAGEMENT CORP. v. WHITE, ROBERT

The petitioner, a third-party administrator for the New York Liquidation Bureau (NYLB), initiated a proceeding to collect a workers' compensation lien from respondent Robert White. The lien arose from benefits paid by NYLB after White's original insurer, Legion Insurance Company, entered liquidation. White settled a third-party personal injury action in May 2007 and paid Legion's lien, but did not resolve the NYLB's separate lien. The Supreme Court denied White's motion to dismiss the petition as time-barred and granted the petitioner's requested relief. However, the appellate court reversed, holding that the three-year statute of limitations for workers' compensation liens under Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 began on the settlement date of the third-party action (May 23, 2007). As the proceeding was commenced on July 22, 2010, more than three years later, it was deemed time-barred. The court further clarified that Legion's pre-liquidation lien and NYLB's post-liquidation lien were distinct, and payment to Legion did not restart the statute of limitations for NYLB.

Workers' Compensation LienStatute of LimitationsThird-Party ActionInsurance LiquidationTime-Barred ClaimAppellate ReviewSeparate LiensPayment DoctrineNew York LawMotion to Dismiss
References
4
Case No. ADJ2759696 (VNO 0492027)
Regular
Oct 11, 2010

WOON YOUNG PARK vs. FILM PAYMENT SERVICES, INC., CHARTIS INSURANCE

The Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the WCJ's decision on the defendant's credit for overpaid temporary disability. The defendant is allowed credit for temporary disability payments made from March 26, 2009, to June 3, 2009, at the temporary disability rate. Further credit is granted for payments made from June 4, 2009, to December 7, 2009, at the permanent disability rate of $185.00 per week. The Board denied further credit due to insufficient evidence regarding post-AME report overpayments.

Petition for ReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityTemporary DisabilityCreditStipulated AwardAgreed Medical ExaminationPermanent and StationarySection 4909Abuse of DiscretionDue Process
References
0
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

Claim of Keselman v. New York City Transit Authority

Claimant, injured in 1986, initially established a right shoulder injury. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this but denied a causally related neck injury in 1996. After another application in 1998 alleging a worsened neck condition, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found a causally related neck injury and permanent partial disability, awarding benefits from February 5, 1998, which the Board affirmed. Separately, the Board also ruled the employer was entitled to credit schedule payments against disability payments made after February 5, 1998. The court affirmed both decisions, finding substantial evidence supported the deterioration of the neck injury post-1996 and that schedule awards are independent of actual disability periods, thus allowing the employer's credit.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilitySchedule AwardDisability PaymentsNeck InjuryRight Shoulder InjuryCausally Related InjuryReopening CaseMedical EvidenceMRI
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Bibb (In Re Delta Air Lines)

Delta Air Lines, Inc., the Debtor, initiated an adversary proceeding against the Government Services Administration, seeking a declaratory judgment to prevent the Government from deducting pre-petition overpayments for services from post-petition amounts owed. Delta argued that such an offset was prohibited by the automatic stay provisions of Sections 362(a)(3) and (6) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Government asserted its right to offset under the Transportation Payment Act and the equitable doctrine of recoupment. The court found that the Transportation Payment Act does not create a payment scheme allowing such deductions and that the claims did not arise from a 'single integrated transaction' for equitable recoupment. Therefore, the court concluded that the Government is not entitled to set off its pre-petition claims against its post-petition liabilities, granting Delta's request for declaratory judgment.

Bankruptcy LawAutomatic StaySetoffRecoupmentGovernment ContractsTransportation Payment ActDeclaratory JudgmentPre-petition ClaimsPost-petition LiabilitiesCreditor Protection
References
54
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Olivo v. Olivo

The New York Court of Appeals addressed two cases, Tan-chick v Tanchick and Olivo v Olivo, concerning the equitable distribution of early retirement incentive packages accepted by former husbands post-divorce. The incentive package from Eastman Kodak Company included an Enhanced Retirement Income Benefit, a Social Security Bridge Payment, and a separation payment. The court ruled that generally, post-divorce early retirement incentives are not marital property and thus not subject to equitable distribution. However, the portion of the package that specifically enhances pension benefits is considered marital property. Consequently, the Appellate Division's order in Tan-chick v Tanchick, which denied the former wife rights to the Social Security Bridge Payment and separation allowance, was affirmed. In Olivo v Olivo, the Appellate Division's order was modified to allow the former wife to share in the enhanced retirement income benefit, calculating her pro rata share against the pension actually obtained.

Equitable DistributionMarital PropertyPension BenefitsEarly Retirement IncentiveQualified Domestic Relations OrderDeferred CompensationPost-Divorce AssetsSpousal RightsEastman Kodak CompanyNY Court of Appeals Precedent
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

DBL Liquidating Trust v. Clarkson Construction Co. (In Re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc.)

DBL Liquidating Trust (Drexel) appealed the Bankruptcy Court's denial of summary judgment in a claim filed by Clarkson Construction Company (Clarkson). The core issue was whether Clarkson ratified approximately 3,000 unauthorized trading transactions by failing to object in writing, despite explicit contractual requirements. Clarkson argued that oral assurances from their broker, Thomas Carpenter, stating 'nothing much was going on,' constituted an oral modification or grounds for equitable estoppel. However, the court found no legal basis for these arguments, emphasizing that the Account Agreement mandated written modifications and timely written objections. The court also highlighted that Clarkson's comptroller, authorized to review account statements, never raised any objections to the trades. Consequently, the District Court reversed the Bankruptcy Court's decision, ruling that Clarkson failed to present a triable issue of fact and dismissing Clarkson's claim.

Securities TradingBrokerage ContractSummary JudgmentEquitable EstoppelOral ModificationRatificationCommodity Customer Account AgreementUnauthorized TradingWritten ObjectionCustomer-Broker Relations
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stankowski v. Kim

Plaintiff's decedent, Janusz Stankowski, was killed after being struck by a truck backing into Post & Taback's loading dock at the New York City Terminal Market. Plaintiff alleged negligence against Post & Taback for maintaining a dangerous condition (debris) and failing to control traffic, claiming the debris caused Stankowski to slip and be struck again. The IAS court denied Post & Taback's motion for summary judgment, but the appellate court reversed, finding no admissible evidence of Stankowski slipping on debris and no duty for Post & Taback to maintain the area where the accident occurred or control traffic. The dissent argued that issues of fact remained regarding the debris contributing to the accident and Post & Taback's duty to clear the area close to its dock.

Summary JudgmentNegligencePremises LiabilityWrongful DeathAppellate ReviewEvidentiary RulesHearsay EvidenceTraffic ControlLoading Dock AccidentDuty of Care
References
16
Showing 1-10 of 3,541 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