Skip to main content

Matter of Pandolfi v. Plainedge Union Free Sch. Dist.

N.Y. App. Div.November 20, 2025No. CV-24-1068Cited 1 time
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Appellate Division reversed the Workers' Compensation Board's denial of counsel fees to claimant's prior attorney and remitted the matter for the Board to consider the fee application under Workers' Compensation Law § 24.

What This Ruling Means

# Pandolfi v. Plainedge Union Free School District ## What Happened An employee filed a workers' compensation claim with the Plainedge Union Free School District. During the case, the employee's attorney was removed without being replaced by another lawyer. The Workers' Compensation Board denied payment of fees to the original attorney. ## What the Court Decided New York's Appellate Division reversed the board's decision. The court found that the law does allow an attorney to receive fees even after being replaced, as long as the attorney did work on the case before leaving. ## Why This Matters for Workers This ruling protects employees' ability to pay attorneys who help them with workers' compensation claims. Even if you switch lawyers or fire your current one, the original attorney can still receive fair payment for their work. This ensures that experienced lawyers are willing to take workers' compensation cases, knowing they'll get paid for their efforts. The case was sent back for the board to reconsider the fee amount.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.