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

Tracey Road Equipment, Inc. v. Village of Johnson City

This case involves two appeals from orders and judgments of the Supreme Court in Broome County. Action No. 1 concerned Tracey Road Equipment, Inc.'s request for a declaratory judgment against the Village of Johnson City regarding insurance coverage for a street sweeper involved in an accident. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to Johnson City, finding it not obligated to defend or indemnify Tracey Road, which was affirmed on appeal. Action No. 2 involved the Insurance Company of North America (INA) seeking a declaratory judgment against St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, contending St. Paul was a coinsurer for Johnson City in the same accident. The Supreme Court denied INA's motion, but the appellate court reversed, declaring INA and St. Paul to be coinsurers and obligating St. Paul to pay half of Johnson City's defense and indemnification costs.

Insurance Coverage DisputeDeclaratory JudgmentSummary JudgmentLease Agreement InterpretationCoinsuranceVehicle LiabilityAppellate ReviewContractual IndemnityMotor Vehicle AccidentInsurance Policy Interpretation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2003

Yanulavich v. Appeals Board of Administrative Adjudication Bureau of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles

The petitioner appealed the dismissal of his CPLR article 78 proceeding, which challenged the Department of Motor Vehicles' (DMV) revocation of his driver's license. The revocation stemmed from an incident where the petitioner, who reported vision issues due to diabetes, struck a flag person. After failing initial vision tests and subsequently passing with corrective lenses, the petitioner failed a road test, leading to the license revocation. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, ruling that the DMV had reasonable grounds, based on the accident, the petitioner's statement, and his physician's report, to require a road test, thus supporting the revocation.

driver's licenselicense revocationvision impairmentdiabetesroad test failureadministrative appealCPLR Article 78Vehicle and Traffic Lawreasonable groundsmotor vehicle accident
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rosello v. Long Island Rail Road

John Rosello sued The Long Island Rail Road Company under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) after sustaining neck and head injuries while working. A jury awarded him over $1.9 million in damages for pain, suffering, and lost earnings. The defendant filed a post-trial motion for a new trial or remittitur, arguing the awards were excessive and citing pre-existing conditions and the plaintiff's smoking habit. The court denied the defendant's motion, affirming the jury's verdict by comparing the awards to similar FELA cases and crediting the treating physician's testimony that the accident caused the injuries and necessitated two spinal surgeries.

FELANegligencePersonal InjurySpinal InjuryNeck InjuryBackhoe AccidentDamages AwardPain and SufferingLost WagesMedical Expenses
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Road v. State

The appellate court reversed a Supreme Court order, dismissing a complaint against the Town of Colonie, which was filed by Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Road and its members. Plaintiffs had sued the County of Albany regarding land ownership and the Town of Colonie for tax refunds. The Supreme Court had denied the Town's motion to dismiss, despite a significant delay in serving the complaint. However, the appellate court found that plaintiffs failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay and did not demonstrate the merit of their claims against the Town. Additionally, the complaint was deemed deficient for non-compliance with RPAPL 1515 and General Associations Law § 12, leading to its dismissal against the Town.

Delay in serviceMotion to dismissReal property tax assessmentRPAPL article 15 actionRPTL article 7 proceedingUnincorporated associationFailure to state a claimAppellate reviewProcedural deficiencyComplaint dismissal
References
8
Case No. 2021-08-0819
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2023

Thomas, Donald v. 10 Roads Express, LLC

The employee, Donald D. Thomas, a delivery driver, reported what he believed to be a left great toe sprain sustained while pushing a clutch pedal at work. The employer, 10 Roads Express, LLC, provided a medical panel, and the selected physician diagnosed the employee with gout, stating it was not work-related. Consequently, the employer denied the claim, leading Thomas to file a petition for benefit determination. The trial court subsequently granted the employer's motion for summary judgment, noting Thomas's failure to respond to the motion and the denial of his request for an extension of time. The Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court’s decision, additionally finding the employee's appeal to be frivolous, though it declined to award attorneys' fees and costs to the employer.

Summary Judgment GrantFrivolous Appeal FindingMedical Causation DisputeGout DiagnosisDelivery Driver InjuryProcedural Non-ComplianceAppellate AffirmationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardEmployee Self-RepresentationLack of Response to Motion
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 04, 1987

Madarash v. Long Island Rail Road Co.

Plaintiffs, employees of the Long Island Rail Road Company (LIRR), initially sued LIRR under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) for injuries sustained in a 1983 collision. Subsequently, Green Bus Lines, Inc. (Green Bus) was added as a defendant through an amended complaint, following indications that a Green Bus vehicle caused the accident. Green Bus successfully moved to dismiss these claims, citing lack of subject matter jurisdiction and the absence of "serious injuries" under New York's No-Fault Law. However, the court allowed the LIRR to implead Green Bus and for plaintiffs to file a Second Amended Complaint, re-asserting state law claims against Green Bus. Green Bus then moved to dismiss this Second Amended Complaint on grounds of subject matter jurisdiction and the statute of limitations. The court denied both motions, affirming its pendant-party jurisdiction and ruling that the action was timely under New York's savings statute, N.Y.Civ.Prac.Law § 205(a). The court also critically noted Green Bus's significant delay in challenging jurisdiction, suggesting potential sanctions for needlessly incurred jury selection expenses.

FELAPendant JurisdictionSubject Matter JurisdictionStatute of LimitationsAmended ComplaintFederal Civil ProcedureNew York LawCourt DelaySanctionsPersonal Injury
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Long Island Rail Road

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) sought a preliminary and permanent injunction against the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) to prevent the assignment of its members to a 4 P.M. – 12 A.M. shift. IBEW argued this shift change violated their collective bargaining agreement (CBA) and constituted a 'major dispute' under the Railway Labor Act (RLA), requiring judicial intervention. LIRR countered that the dispute was 'minor,' concerning the interpretation of the CBA's Rule 9A, and therefore fell under the exclusive jurisdiction of an arbitration board. The court found LIRR's arguments 'arguably justified' and not 'frivolous or obviously insubstantial,' relying on the language of Rule 9A and evidence of past practices. Consequently, the court concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, denied IBEW's motions for injunction, and dismissed the complaint.

Railway Labor ActMajor DisputeMinor DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementShift ChangeInjunctionSubject Matter JurisdictionArbitrationStatus QuoRule 9A
References
5
Case No. 2020-06-1140A, 2020-06-1140B, 48475-2020, 48477-2020
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 2021

Payne, Michael v. Road Scholar Staffing, Inc.

Michael Payne sought medical and temporary disability benefits for injuries to his neck, back, and left shoulder resulting from a rollover accident while allegedly employed by Road Scholar Staffing. Neither Road Scholar Staffing nor Yellowstone Transportation Group, both uninsured employers, responded to the claim. The Court found Mr. Payne likely to prove his injuries were work-related and ordered Road Scholar Staffing to provide medical treatment and pay past medical bills. However, his request for temporary disability benefits was denied due to insufficient evidence. Road Scholar Staffing was also referred to the Compliance Program for failing to provide a panel of physicians.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityUninsured EmployerRollover AccidentNeck InjuryBack InjuryShoulder InjuryCompliance Program Referral
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Town of Addison v. Meeks

The Town of Addison (plaintiff) initiated an action against a property owner (defendant) to secure a permanent injunction preventing interference with the public's use and the Town's maintenance of Miller Road. The Town also sought a declaration that Miller Road had become a Town highway under Highway Law § 189. The defendant appealed an order granting a preliminary injunction and the declaration. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision, citing extensive evidence of consistent public use of Miller Road for over ten years by various individuals and entities. Furthermore, the court found that the Town had successfully demonstrated its dominion over the road through longstanding and unchallenged maintenance efforts, including grading, plowing, and drainage improvements.

Highway LawPublic UseTown HighwayProperty RightsInjunctionRoad MaintenanceAppellate DecisionSteuben CountyReal Property
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Morton

Michael Wayne Morton, convicted of his wife's murder in 1987, sought post-conviction forensic DNA testing of various pieces of evidence under chapter 64 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. The district court partially denied his motion, leading to this appeal. The appellate court affirmed the denial of testing for evidence related to a separate murder and for fingerprint evidence, finding these did not meet the statutory requirements of being "secured in relation to the offense" or containing "biological material." However, the court reversed the denial for a blood-stained bandana recovered near the crime scene. The court concluded that if DNA testing on the bandana yielded exculpatory results (Christine's blood and a third party's DNA), there is a greater than 50% likelihood that Morton would not have been convicted, and thus remanded the case for further proceedings concerning the bandana.

forensic DNA testingmurder convictionappealcriminal procedureexculpatory evidenceblood-stained bandanaunidentified fingerprintscircumstantial evidencetime of deathunknown intruder theory
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 1,048 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