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
Mar 05, 2004

United States v. Jaffe

Bernard Jaffe, Jr. pleaded guilty to making false statements to an FDIC-insured bank, defrauding the Bank of New York of $20 million. He was sentenced to 57 months imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay $18.1 million in restitution. The District Court denied his motion for a downward departure based on his 43-year-old daughter's alleged dependency, deeming her not uniquely reliant. Despite initial reservations regarding his cooperation, Jaffe received a three-level sentencing reduction for acceptance of responsibility. The court established a restitution payment schedule, including a 9% interest rate, and clarified that Florida's homestead and federal ERISA pension exemptions would not shield assets from federal restitution obligations, especially once pension funds are distributed.

Fraudulent StatementsBank FraudSentencing GuidelinesRestitution OrderDownward Departure DenialAcceptance of ResponsibilityERISA BenefitsFlorida Homestead ExemptionFinancial DisclosureVictim Compensation
References
43
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Sabhnani

This memorandum of decision addresses the restitution owed by Varsha Mahender Sabhnani and Mahender Murlidhar Sabhnani, who were convicted of forced labor, harboring aliens, conspiracy, peonage, and document servitude. The Court applies 18 U.S.C. § 1593, mandating restitution in such cases, and incorporates provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). It determines that the victims, Samirah and Enung, did not reside in a 'home-like environment' with the defendants, negating FLSA exemptions for domestic workers regarding sleep and meal periods. The Court also finds that liquidated damages under the FLSA are compensatory and applicable to this criminal restitution case, rejecting the defendants' arguments about the statute of limitations and the need for a jury trial for damages. Ultimately, the Court awards Samirah $620,743.82 and Enung $315,802.40 in total restitution, including liquidated damages, based on detailed calculations of unpaid wages.

Forced LaborRestitutionFair Labor Standards ActPeonageDocument ServitudeAlien HarboringLiquidated DamagesEquitable TollingStatute of LimitationsDomestic Workers
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Kestenbaum

Joshua Kestenbaum, on probation for conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, was charged by the United States Probation Department for the Eastern District of New York with violating his probation conditions. District Judge Nina Gershon found that Kestenbaum knowingly and willfully made false statements to the government and the Probation Department, and failed to make required restitution payments. The court concluded that Kestenbaum had sufficient resources to pay restitution but chose to maintain his lifestyle instead. The motion to dismiss Charge 3, related to restitution failure, was denied, and Kestenbaum's resentencing was set for February 27, 2013.

Probation ViolationFalse StatementsRestitution PaymentsFinancial DisclosureCriminal HistorySentencing GuidelinesWire FraudBank FraudWillful Non-PaymentMaterial Misrepresentation
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Morrison

Defendant Rodney Morrison was convicted of RICO conspiracy involving the sale and distribution of contraband cigarettes and illegal firearm possession. The State and City of New York sought restitution as victims of the RICO conspiracy. The Court found the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) applicable. It determined that the State of New York is a direct victim, but the City of New York is not, as its claimed harm was not directly and proximately caused by the specific conduct Morrison was convicted of (lacking New York State tax stamps). Consequently, the State's restitution application is granted in part, limited to tax losses from actual CCTA violations between October 1996 and September 2004, while the City's application is denied. The State must submit further documentation consistent with these limitations.

RestitutionRICO ConspiracyContraband CigarettesTax EvasionMVRAVWPAState Tax LossCriminal SentencingFederal Court DecisionProximate Causation
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 1991

Ass'n of Surrogates & Supreme Court Reporters Within the City of New York v. New York

This case involves a motion by Defendant Matthew T. Crosson for an order entering judgment following a remand from the Second Circuit. The Second Circuit had declared New York's lag-payroll law unconstitutional, enjoining its effects and directing restitution of lagged wages for affected nonjudicial employees of the Unified Court System. The key issue in this district court opinion is whether the restitution should be paid from the 1990-1991 Judiciary Budget, which was set to lapse, and whether prejudgment interest should be awarded. The court granted Defendant Crosson's motion, ordering the immediate payment of lagged wages totaling $9.2 million from the 1990-1991 appropriation to avoid further layoffs and ensure timely restitution. Additionally, the court awarded prejudgment interest at a rate of nine percent, calculated from March 13, 1991, to fully compensate the plaintiffs for the delayed payment of their rightfully earned wages.

Lag Payroll LawConstitutional LawContract ClauseEquitable RemediesRestitutionPrejudgment InterestState Finance LawJudiciary BudgetSecond CircuitDistrict Court Decision
References
18
Case No. SJO 181617 SJO 181469 SJO 187564 SJO 187565
Regular
Sep 17, 2007

ANITA BLICK vs. TOWN OF ATHERTON, CITIES INSURANCE GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award because the applicant's criminal conviction, which was the basis for restitution, had been vacated. The Board determined that restitution claims are intrinsically linked to the vocational rehabilitation benefits claim. Therefore, the case is returned to the trial level for a new WCJ to decide both issues after the applicant's criminal proceedings are finally resolved.

Vocational RehabilitationVRMARestitutionPenal Code section 550(b)(3)FraudCriminal ConvictionVacated ConvictionReconsiderationAppeals BoardWCJ
References
0
Case No. ANA 0378959
Regular
May 27, 2000

MAI HO vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse a restitution order against chiropractor Vu Phan, D.C., who provided unauthorized treatment. While Phan is not entitled to further payment for treatment not authorized by the employer, the Board found that the employer voluntarily paid $6,500 for past treatment and thus cannot recover it absent fraud, thus denying the employer's restitution claim. The Board otherwise affirmed the original decision denying Phan's lien claim for the unauthorized treatment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantRestitutionOverpaymentMedical treatmentUnauthorized treatmentPrimary treating physicianSelf-procured treatmentUnjust enrichmentVoluntary payment
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ahmed v. City of New York

The New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) promulgated "Health Care Rules" to deduct six cents per fare from taxi drivers for health care services and disability coverage. Petitioners, including taxi drivers, challenged these rules, arguing they were ultra vires and violated the separation of powers. The Supreme Court annulled the rules but initially denied restitution. On appeal, the court affirmed the annulment, finding the TLC exceeded its authority and acted arbitrarily in establishing the deductions. The appellate court modified the lower court's decision, granting the petitioners' request for restitution of the improperly deducted funds.

New York City Taxi and Limousine CommissionHealth Care RulesUltra ViresSeparation of PowersArbitrary and CapriciousRestitutionTaxi DriversDisability CoverageRegulatory AuthorityAdministrative Law
References
10
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 05688
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2025

Matter of Sahara Constr. Corp. v. New York City Off. of Admin. Trials & Hearings

Sahara Construction Corp. challenged a determination by the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH) that upheld civil penalties and a restitution order for violations related to a home improvement project. The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed the CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court confirmed OATH's determination, finding that the imposed civil penalties of $5,000 and restitution of $230,266.63 were not disproportionate and fell within statutory guidelines. The Court also affirmed the denial of the petitioner's motions to dismiss and compel discovery, concluding they were not arbitrary and capricious. Consequently, the petition was denied, and the proceeding dismissed on the merits.

Home Improvement ContractorsCivil PenaltiesRestitution AwardAdministrative Code ViolationsCPLR Article 78Judicial ReviewAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionSense of FairnessAdministrative Summons
References
7
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00962 [202 AD3d 524]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2022

4A Gen. Contr. Corp. v. James

Plaintiffs, 4A General Contracting Corp. and others, sought to recover a $1 million payment made to the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) under a plea agreement, which resolved a criminal case concerning failure to pay prevailing wages on public work projects. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint, ruling that the $1 million was a restitution payment, not an escrow, and plaintiffs had no valid claim to recover it. The court also found no basis for plaintiffs to recover from RLI Insurance Co., who received a portion of the restitution through a separate settlement. Furthermore, the denial of plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment to dismiss RLI Insurance Co.'s counterclaim for indemnification was affirmed.

Prevailing wagesPlea agreementRestitutionGrand larcenyCertified payroll recordsIndemnification counterclaimSummary judgmentCriminal case resolutionAppellate reviewAttorney General
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 59 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