Matter of Blake v. Niagara Wheatfield Cent. Sch. Dist.

2026 NY Slip Op 00949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026) · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department · February 19, 2026 · No. CV-24-1460

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, Third Department, held that a claimant classified as permanently partially disabled in 2011, while employed at or above preinjury wages, was attached to the labor market at the time of classification. Applying the retroactive 2017 amendment to Workers' Compensation Law § 15(3)(w), the court concluded that the claimant was not required to demonstrate ongoing labor-market attachment for benefits under the earlier claim. The court reversed that portion of the Workers' Compensation Board's amended decision and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Holdings

  1. The due process challenge was unpreserved because it was not raised before the Workers' Compensation Board. In any event, the Special Fund was not aggrieved by the Board's labor-market-attachment determination, and only the Special Fund possessed standing to object to an alleged violation of its own procedural due process rights.
  2. The 2017 amendment applied retroactively to Claim No. 1 because claimant had been classified with a permanent partial disability before the amendment, was attached to the labor market at classification by virtue of her full-time employment, and had not previously been found to have voluntarily withdrawn from the labor market or failed to establish attachment.
  3. Claimant was not required to demonstrate ongoing attachment to the labor market following her 2011 classification with a permanent partial disability in Claim No. 1.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether claimant's procedural due process challenge based on the Special Fund's lack of notice and participation was preserved and, if so, whether claimant could assert the Special Fund's due process rights.
  2. Whether Workers' Compensation Law § 15(3)(w), as amended in 2017, applied retroactively to relieve claimant of the requirement to demonstrate ongoing labor-market attachment in Claim No. 1.
  3. Whether the Board properly required claimant to demonstrate ongoing labor-market attachment after her 2011 permanent-partial-disability classification.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (15)

  • Matter of Kigin v State of N.Y. Workers' Compensation Bd., 24 NY3d 459, 469 (2014)(followed)
  • Matter of Sheikh v White & Blue Group Corp., 168 AD3d 1196, 1199 (3d Dept 2019)(followed)
  • Matter of Alzate v Quality Bldg. Servs. Corp., 238 AD3d 1437, 1440 (3d Dept 2025), lv denied 44 NY3d 910 (2026)(followed)
  • Matter of Talarico v Niagara County Dept. of Social Servs., 225 AD3d 1061, 1062 (3d Dept 2024)(followed)
  • Matter of Digbasanis v Pelham Bay Donuts Inc., 224 AD3d 1047, 1048 (3d Dept 2024)(followed)
  • Matter of O'Donnell v Erie County, 35 NY3d 14, 21 (2020)(followed)
  • Matter of Scott v Visiting Nurses Home Care, 172 AD3d 1868, 1870, 1872 (3d Dept 2019), lv dismissed 34 NY3d 1011 (2019)(followed)
  • Matter of Ryan v City of Albany Water Dept., 244 AD3d 1475, 1476 (3d Dept 2025)(followed)
  • Matter of Delk v Orange & Rockland, 191 AD3d 1067, 1070 (3d Dept 2021)(followed)
  • Matter of Ireland v Cattaraugus County Dept. of Nursing Homes-Olean Pines, 182 AD3d 956, 958 (3d Dept 2020)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…