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

Gavigan v. State

Claimant, an employee of Horizon Roofing & Sheet Metal, Inc., sustained serious personal injuries in April 1989 while working on a State-owned property. He sought permission to file a late notice of claim against the State, alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240, and 241 due to an improperly constructed and maintained rampway. The Court of Claims initially denied two motions but subsequently granted a third, finding sufficient factors under Court of Claims Act § 10 (6) to support its decision, including the merit of the claim and timely notice to a State employee. The State appealed this decision, arguing an abuse of discretion. The appellate court affirmed the Court of Claims' order, concluding that the lower court did not abuse its broad discretion.

Late Notice of ClaimState LiabilityOwner LiabilityConstruction AccidentPersonal InjuryCourt of Claims ActLabor Law ViolationsRampway SafetyEmployee InjuryAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

De Blasio v. United States

This action was brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act by Jean and Clifton DeBlasio against the United States for personal injuries sustained by Jean at the Gateway Sports Center. The plaintiffs alleged negligence due to protruding cement nodules on a sidewalk. The United States moved for summary judgment, asserting it could not be sued for the acts or omissions of its independent contractors. The court found that Shields and Dean Concessions, Inc., which operated the Sports Center, was an independent contractor and that the government lacked day-to-day supervisory control. Consequently, the Federal Tort Claims Act did not apply, and the motion for summary judgment was granted, finding the United States immune from suit.

Federal Tort Claims ActSovereign ImmunityIndependent ContractorSummary JudgmentPersonal InjuryNegligenceGovernment LiabilityConcessionaireNational Park ServiceControl Test
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kenna v. United States

Plaintiffs John and Mary Kenna sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for alleged negligence. John Kenna, a security guard at an IRS facility, was assaulted by an IRS employee, Kerry P. Hasapidis, whom the plaintiffs claim the IRS negligently hired, supervised, and retained despite knowledge of his violent propensities and mental health issues. Mary Kenna also sought damages for loss of consortium. The defendant moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing the claim was barred by the FTCA's intentional tort exception (§ 2680(h)), which covers claims arising out of assault or battery. The Court, citing Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedents, found that the plaintiffs' claims, though framed as negligent hiring and supervision, directly stemmed from the assault and battery committed by a government employee acting within the scope of his employment. The Court concluded that the government had not waived its sovereign immunity for this type of claim, thereby granting the defendant's motion and dismissing the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Federal Tort Claims ActFTCASovereign ImmunityIntentional Tort ExceptionNegligent HiringNegligent SupervisionAssaultBatteryFederal EmployeeScope of Employment
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hightower v. United States

Willie Hightower, a federal employee, sued the United States and three individual federal officers for alleged injuries from a 1999 arrest at a VA hospital campus. Hightower sought money damages under state tort laws via the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and constitutional claims under Bivens, despite having already received benefits under the Federal Employee's Compensation Act (FECA) for the same incident, which he certified as work-related. The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It ruled that FECA provides the exclusive remedy for federal employees' work-related injuries, thereby precluding FTCA claims against the United States. Furthermore, Bivens claims against the United States are barred by sovereign immunity, and against individual federal employees, they are precluded by the comprehensive remedial schemes of FECA and the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA).

Federal Employee Compensation ActFederal Tort Claims ActBivens ActionSovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionExcessive ForceFalse ArrestMalicious ProsecutionSlanderLibel
References
31
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 01453 [159 AD3d 674]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 07, 2018

Grasso v. New York State Thruway Auth.

This case involves four consolidated personal injury claims filed by Jerry A. Grasso, Jr., John Sullivan, Jr., Cathy Marl, and Louis Centolanza against the New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA). The claimants alleged violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 (6), and common-law negligence, stemming from injuries sustained during a highway construction project. The Court of Claims initially granted NYSTA's motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims based on collateral estoppel. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the dismissal of claims under Labor Law § 241 (6) and for punitive damages, finding collateral estoppel applicable and punitive damages barred by sovereign immunity. However, the Appellate Division modified the order by denying the dismissal of claims alleging Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence, concluding that collateral estoppel did not apply to NYSTA as a property owner and that NYSTA acted in a proprietary capacity, thus subject to tort liability.

Labor Law § 200Labor Law § 241 (6)Common-law NegligenceCollateral EstoppelSummary JudgmentSovereign ImmunityGovernmental Function ImmunityProprietary FunctionPersonal InjuryConstruction Site Accident
References
33
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04119 [141 AD3d 43]
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2016

Costa v. State of New York

Claimant Modesto Costa, a construction worker, sustained injuries at Pier 40 due to a collapsing metal beam. Pier 40 is owned by the State of New York but managed by the Hudson River Park Trust. After an initial claim against New York City was dismissed, Costa sought to file a late notice of claim against the State of New York. The Court of Claims denied this motion, asserting the State was not a proper party due to the legislative transfer of legal obligations to the Trust under the Hudson River Park Act. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed this decision, holding that despite retaining record title, the State was not an "owner" for Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) liability purposes. The court reasoned that the Hudson River Park Act, particularly the clause stating the Trust "shall succeed to all...other legal obligations," demonstrated legislative intent to exempt the State from such liability. This intent was further supported by a 2013 amendment requiring the State to indemnify the Trust, indicating that the original Act intended the Trust to bear sole legal responsibility for injuries in the Park. Therefore, the State was not a proper party to the action.

Labor Law liabilityOwner liabilityAbsolute liabilityPublic benefit corporationHudson River Park ActStatutory interpretationLate notice of claimProperty ownershipLessees liabilityGovernmental immunity
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 1996

Doe v. United States

Plaintiffs Jane and John Doe filed an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) against the United States, seeking damages for injuries Jane Doe sustained after being pricked by an HIV-infected patient's needle during a phlebotomy rotation at the Buffalo Veterans’ Administration Medical Center (VAMC). The plaintiffs allege gross negligence, breach of contract, and wrongful disclosure of confidential information, claiming emotional distress and loss of consortium. The government moved to dismiss, asserting that the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) provides the exclusive remedy, as a FECA claim for Ms. Doe's puncture wound had been accepted. The court denied the government's motion to dismiss but ordered a stay of proceedings, ruling that a substantial question exists regarding FECA's applicability and Ms. Doe's employee status, which must be definitively determined by the Secretary of Labor before the court can proceed with the FTCA claims.

Federal Tort Claims ActFederal Employees' Compensation ActSubject Matter JurisdictionSovereign ImmunityExclusive RemedyJudicial ReviewEmployee Status DisputeEmotional Distress ClaimLoss of ConsortiumMedical Negligence
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Foster Wheeler Corp.

This case concerns a dispute between the United States Government, through its Agency for International Development (AID), and Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company (MHT) over an allegedly erroneous payment. MHT, acting as a confirming bank, paid Cargo Export Corporation (CEC) based on documentation AID claimed did not comply with the terms of a Letter of Credit related to a fertilizer plant project in Bangladesh. AID sought to recover the reimbursed amount and penalties under the Foreign Assistance Act, alleging MHT should have known the documents were false. MHT moved for summary judgment, challenging AID's standing and the applicability of the Act. The court granted MHT's motion regarding the Letter of Credit and Letter of Commitment claims, concluding AID lacked standing or failed to state a claim. However, the court denied MHT's motion for summary judgment concerning the False Claims Act, ruling that confirming banks can be 'persons' under the Act and that a triable issue of fact exists regarding MHT's prudence.

Letter of Credit disputeConfirming bank liabilityFalse Claims Act litigationForeign Assistance ActSummary judgment motionsStanding doctrineContract interpretationInternational banking lawDocumentary credit fraudGovernment agency oversight
References
13
Case No. CA 13-02050 (CLAIM NO. 107559)
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 02, 2015

LM BUSINESS ASSOCIATES, INC. v. STATE OF NEW YORK

This case involves an appeal from a judgment by the Court of Claims that found the State of New York liable for conversion and negligent misrepresentation. The claimants' computers were seized in 2001 during an investigation into alleged fraudulent activities. The Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, unanimously reversed the judgment and dismissed the amended claim. The court determined that the State's control over the computers did not constitute conversion, as it was authorized by a valid, unchallenged search warrant and the property remained in the custody of the law until judicially ordered returned. Furthermore, the court found no negligent misrepresentation due to the absence of a 'privity-like relationship' between an investigator and the target of an investigation. Finally, the court dismissed the constitutional tort claim, noting that claimants had adequate remedies in alternate forums.

ConversionNegligent MisrepresentationSearch and SeizureState LiabilityAppellate ReversalCivil ProcedureProperty LawFraud InvestigationDue ProcessConstitutional Tort
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. State

Herbert W. Jones, Jr., an account clerk at Attica Correctional Facility, died from a gunshot wound during the 1971 Attica uprising's retaking operation. His widow, as administratrix, filed a wrongful death claim against the State, asserting both negligence and intentional tort. Earlier, the negligence claim was dismissed due to workers' compensation exclusivity, but the intentional tort claim was reinstated on appeal. This current appeal by the State challenges a judgment awarding damages to the claimant. The court affirmed the judgment, finding that the "full-scale armed assault" during the retaking constituted excessive force, and the State's actions, including arming and directing troopers to fire, demonstrated an intent to inflict injury, thereby overcoming the workers' compensation exclusivity defense.

Attica prison riotwrongful deathintentional tortstate liabilityexcessive forceworkers' compensationgovernment misconductpolice brutalityprison uprisingcivil liability
References
28
Showing 1-10 of 23,320 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