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
Jul 31, 1996

In re Keisha McL.

This case involves an order of disposition from the Family Court, Bronx County, entered on July 31, 1996. The order placed the subject children with the Commissioner for the Administration of Children’s Services for 12 months and directed their foster care agency to commence a termination of parental rights proceeding. This action was taken based on a fact-finding determination that the respondent had sexually abused two of the children. The children's out-of-court statements regarding the abuse were cross-corroborated by each other and further supported by consistent repetitions to their foster mother, a psychologist, and a social worker. Expert testimony confirmed the children's knowledge of sexual acts and symptomatic behavioral changes. The court inferred that the touching was for sexual gratification due to the absence of an innocent explanation. The order was unanimously affirmed.

Child Sexual AbuseFamily CourtTermination of Parental RightsChild WelfareExpert TestimonyCorroborated StatementsChild Protection ServicesDispositional OrderSexual Gratification InferenceBehavioral Changes
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2009

In re Selena R.

The Family Court of Bronx County issued an order of disposition finding a father guilty of sexually abusing his son, Tyler T., derivatively abusing Selena R., and neglecting both children. The court released the children to the mother's custody under strict supervision and restricted the father's contact with them. The appellate court modified the order, vacating the finding of neglect due to excessive corporal punishment, but affirmed the remaining aspects of the decision. The sexual abuse finding was corroborated by a social worker's testimony detailing the children's symptomatic behavior, including age-inappropriate sexual knowledge. However, the claim of excessive corporal punishment was not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

sexual abusechild neglectderivative abusecorporal punishmentfamily court lawappellate procedureevidence sufficiencysocial worker testimonychild welfareparental rights
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 1995

In re Najam M.

The Family Court's dismissal of a child abuse petition, brought by the Commissioner of Social Services and the Law Guardian for Najam M. against her respondent father, was reversed on appeal. The appellate court reinstated the petition and entered a finding of sexual abuse, remanding the case for further proceedings. Expert medical testimony from Dr. Jamie Hoffman Rosenfeld, a child abuse specialist, detailed physical abnormalities in the child consistent with chronic manipulation and sexual abuse, which she affirmed could not be self-inflicted. The child's consistent allegations of abuse by her father, made to multiple individuals, further supported the medical findings. The court determined that the petitioner had established a prima facie case of child abuse, which the parents' explanation failed to rebut.

Child AbuseSexual AbuseFamily CourtAppellate ReversalExpert Medical TestimonyHymenal InjuryPrima Facie CaseBurden of ProofChild InterviewParental Explanation Rebuttal
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Guce

The defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, incest, and endangering the welfare of a child. The appeal challenged the Supreme Court's decision to allow the child victims to testify via live, two-way, closed-circuit television, with the defendant remaining outside the room, citing their vulnerability and potential for severe emotional harm. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding that these procedures were constitutional and supported by clear and convincing evidence of extraordinary circumstances and the children's vulnerability. The court also found no error in allowing sworn and unsworn testimony, the use of anatomically correct dolls, or the admissibility of expert testimony regarding child sexual abuse syndrome, distinguishing the case from previous rulings.

Child Sexual AbuseVulnerable WitnessesConfrontation ClauseClosed-Circuit Television TestimonyWitness TraumaAppellate ReviewSixth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentExpert TestimonyPosttraumatic Stress Syndrome
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Swift v. Swift

This case involves an appeal by the petitioner-mother from a Family Court order in Broome County, which granted the respondent-father unsupervised visitation rights with their two children. The petitioner alleged sexual abuse of their daughter, Sarah, by the respondent, leading to a temporary order for supervised visitation. Despite two reports to the State Child Abuse Hotline, which were deemed unfounded after investigation, the petitioner sought termination of visitation. The Family Court ultimately found that the petitioner failed to sustain her burden of proof regarding the sexual abuse allegations, a decision which the appellate court affirmed. The appellate court deferred to the trial court's credibility findings and its reasons for rejecting corroborating "validation evidence," noting concerns about the petitioner's influence, the social worker's inexperience, and the context of contested custody litigation.

Child VisitationSexual Abuse AllegationsCredibility FindingsHearsay CorroborationValidation EvidenceAppellate ReviewFamily Court OrderParental HostilityChild Custody LitigationExpert Testimony
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'Neil v. Roman Catholic Diocese

A student worker at St. Ephrem’s Church (the plaintiff) experienced sexual harassment from a visiting priest. After a particularly egregious incident, she informed other parish priests who promptly referred her to law enforcement. The plaintiff subsequently sued the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and St. Ephrem’s Church for sexual harassment, negligence, negligent hiring, and negligent supervision, arguing they should have known of the priest's propensity. The Supreme Court, Kings County, granted summary judgment to the Diocese defendants, dismissing the plaintiff's claims, finding they lacked actual or constructive knowledge. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding that the defendants met their burden in demonstrating no prior knowledge of the visiting priest's conduct and acted diligently once informed.

Sexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentNegligenceNegligent HiringNegligent SupervisionSummary JudgmentEmployer LiabilityConstructive KnowledgeDiscriminationNew York City Human Rights Law
References
8
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 07752
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 17, 2016

Matter of Keniya G. (Avery P.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Family Court order which found appellant Avery P. to be a person legally responsible for the child M.W. and guilty of neglect, with derivative neglect for other children. The court determined that Avery P. acted as the functional equivalent of a parent, citing his regular involvement in the children's care and household contributions. Crucially, M.W.'s out-of-court statement regarding a sexually threatening comment from Avery P. was corroborated by his criminal history of sexual assault against minors and his classification as a high-risk sex offender. The court found sufficient evidence to support the finding of neglect.

NeglectChild ProtectionParental ResponsibilityFunctional Equivalent of a ParentSex OffenderRecidivismCorroborationFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewChild Welfare
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Doe v. City of New York

Plaintiff was the victim of a violent sexual assault and robbery on Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) property near the Shea Stadium/Willets Avenue subway station. She commenced an action against the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA), the City of New York, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), and LIRR, alleging negligence, including failure to maintain the premises in a safe condition by not removing a shantytown inhabited by homeless individuals, and failure to report the presence of illegal aliens to federal authorities. The court granted summary judgment to all defendants. It found NYCTA not liable as the incident did not occur on its property. The City was not liable for negligent performance of a governmental function (police protection) due to the absence of a special relationship with the plaintiff. MTA/LIRR were also found immune, as their actions concerning homeless policy were considered governmental functions, not proprietary. Furthermore, the claim regarding failure to report illegal aliens was dismissed as the relevant statute (8 USC § 1373) does not impose an affirmative duty or create a private right of action. The plaintiff's request for further discovery was denied.

Sexual AssaultRobberyNegligence ClaimGovernmental ImmunityProprietary FunctionHomeless PolicySummary Judgment GrantedDiscovery SanctionsLIRR PropertyNYCTA Liability
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2008

People v. Beauharnois

This case is an appeal from a judgment convicting the defendant of sexual abuse, course of sexual conduct, predatory sexual assault, predatory sexual assault against a child, and endangering the welfare of a child. The conviction stemmed from a victim's testimony detailing years of sexual abuse by the defendant, corroborated by a pediatrician's expert medical testimony. On appeal, the defendant challenged the verdict's weight of evidence and argued that the course of sexual conduct conviction was a lesser included offense of predatory sexual assault. The appellate court affirmed the jury's credibility findings and the medical evidence. It modified the judgment by dismissing the conviction for course of sexual conduct as a lesser included offense, but upheld the conviction for endangering the welfare of a child and the sentences imposed.

Sexual abusePredatory sexual assaultChild endangermentLesser included offenseAppellate reviewVictim credibilityExpert medical testimonyCriminal convictionSentencingJudicial discretion
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 02, 2009

People v. Andrus

Defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of attempted course of sexual conduct against a child. He argued his Miranda rights were violated, but the court found a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver. The court also rejected his claim that a social worker acted as a law enforcement agent without issuing Miranda warnings, noting the interview's timing and continuous custody. Furthermore, police deception regarding a polygraph did not coerce his statement or deny due process. His challenge to his Alford plea was unpreserved, and the sentence was deemed appropriate.

Miranda rightsWaiver of rightsRight to counselPolice interrogationSocial worker interviewLaw enforcement agencyVoluntariness of confessionPolice deceptionPolygraph examinationDue process
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 1,055 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