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

Meehan v. United States Postal Service

Plaintiff James Meehan, Administrator of Michael J. Meehan's estate, initiated an action against the U.S. Postal Service, U.S.A., and U.S. Office of Personnel Management under the Federal Group Life Insurance Act (FEGLI). He alleged that his son, Michael J. Meehan, was wrongfully denied free life insurance, despite having signed a waiver during his employment. Defendants sought summary judgment, contending that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff had failed to exhaust the mandatory grievance and arbitration procedures outlined in the collective bargaining agreement. The court concurred with the defendants, ruling that the claim constituted a breach of the collective bargaining agreement, thereby necessitating the exhaustion of administrative remedies prior to judicial review. Additionally, the court noted that the action would have been time-barred by the six-month statute of limitations and that Meehan had properly waived his life insurance.

Federal Group Life Insurance ActSummary JudgmentSubject Matter JurisdictionSovereign ImmunityCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProceduresArbitrationExhaustion of Administrative RemediesStatute of LimitationsLife Insurance Waiver
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Natural Resources Defense Council v. United States Food & Drug Administration

This Memorandum and Order addresses several motions in a case brought by environmental and public interest groups against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The plaintiffs sought to compel the FDA to initiate proceedings to withdraw approval of certain antibiotics used non-therapeutically in livestock. The court, presided over by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV, granted in part the plaintiffs' motion to strike certain documents, adopted the Government's proposed schedule for complying with a previous order, and denied the Government's motion for a stay pending appeal. The judge found the FDA's decades-long delay in fulfilling its statutory duty to be unreasonable, justifying the imposition of a compliance timetable.

Antibiotic ResistanceAnimal Feed RegulationFDA EnforcementAdministrative Procedure ActFood, Drug, and Cosmetic ActMandamusJudicial ReviewStay Pending AppealSummary JudgmentPublic Health
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dirma v. United States

William Dirma, an employee of Coastal Dry Dock & Repair Corp., sued the United States for personal injuries sustained on June 26, 1985, while working on scaffolding on the USS THORN in the Brooklyn Navy Yard. He alleged negligence by the defendant in the erection of the scaffolding. The court found no admiralty jurisdiction as the accident occurred in a dry dock, which is considered an extension of land. However, federal jurisdiction existed under the Federal Torts Claims Act (F.T.C.A.), requiring strict adherence to administrative claim procedures, which the plaintiff allegedly met. The court ultimately determined that Coastal, not the Navy, was responsible for erecting scaffolding and providing a safe workplace, and the plaintiff failed to prove any negligence on the part of the United States. Consequently, the plaintiff's case was dismissed.

Personal InjuryScaffolding AccidentDry DockFederal Tort Claims ActAdmiralty JurisdictionMaritime LawNegligenceIndependent ContractorSovereign ImmunityUSS THORN
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re United Department Stores, Inc.

The debtors, including United Department Stores, Inc. and others, sought to reclassify withdrawal liability claims from the Amalgamated Insurance Fund. These claims, arising from collective bargaining agreements for multiemployer pension contributions, were initially filed as administrative priority expenses. The Fund argued that the liability, triggered post-petition, should retain its priority status as a necessary cost for preserving the estates. However, the Court determined that withdrawal liability, based on pre-petition factors and not directly compensating employees for post-petition services or contributing to the estate's preservation, did not meet the criteria for administrative expenses under the Bankruptcy Code. Consequently, the Debtors' motions were granted, reclassifying the Fund's claims as general unsecured claims.

BankruptcyWithdrawal LiabilityMultiemployer Pension PlanAdministrative ClaimsUnsecured ClaimsEmployee BenefitsERISAMPPAAChapter 11Chapter 7
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 1985

United States v. $100 in United States Currency

The United States initiated an in rem forfeiture action against $100,000 in U.S. currency, alleging it originated from illegal drug transactions. Claimants Jose Martinez-Torres and Nancy Medina asserted the funds were legitimate lottery winnings. The government sought summary judgment, arguing issue preclusion from a prior Nebbia bail hearing where Medina's lottery claim was found incredible. The Court granted partial summary judgment for the government, establishing probable cause for forfeiture. However, it denied the application of offensive collateral estoppel for full summary judgment, citing the distinct procedural environment and limited scope of the Nebbia hearing, and ruled that claimants are entitled to a plenary trial to prove the legitimate source of the funds.

ForfeitureDrug Trafficking ProceedsCollateral EstoppelIssue PreclusionSummary JudgmentProbable CauseIn Rem ForfeitureBail HearingDue Process ConcernsPuerto Rican Lottery
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

The plaintiff, United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers of America, filed a complaint against various defendants, including labor unions, union officials, installers, and a manufacturer of electrical equipment, alleging a conspiracy to deprive its members of collective bargaining rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The defendants moved to dismiss, asserting lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a cause of action. The court, presided over by District Judge Mandelbaum, determined that the National Labor Relations Board holds exclusive jurisdiction over such controversies. Furthermore, the court found that the plaintiff had not exhausted its administrative remedies before the Board. Consequently, the court dismissed the complaint, directing the plaintiff to pursue relief through appropriate administrative proceedings.

Labor LawJurisdictionNational Labor Relations ActCollective BargainingUnfair Labor PracticeAdministrative RemediesExhaustion of RemediesConspiracyBoycottMotion to Dismiss
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fraternal Order of Police, National Labor Council, USPS No. 2 v. United States Postal Service

The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) and 13 individual Postal Police Officers sued the United States Postal Service and its employees, alleging violations of federal and state law, as well as their employment contract. Plaintiffs challenged restrictions on their law enforcement authority, citing 40 U.S.C. § 318, and also claimed illegal locker searches under the Fourth Amendment and New York law. The defendants sought dismissal, primarily arguing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction and the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The court granted the defendants' motion, dismissing the claims. It ruled that Section 318 does not confer a private right of action and that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust the grievance procedures outlined in their collective bargaining agreement and the Postal Reorganization Act for their search and contract-related claims.

Labor LawPostal ServicePolice PowersFourth AmendmentLocker SearchCollective Bargaining AgreementExhaustion of RemediesPrivate Right of ActionSubject Matter JurisdictionMotion to Dismiss
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ryan v. Selsky

Petitioner, who has been incarcerated since 1978 and has multiple convictions including murder, arson, escape, and assault on staff, was subjected to administrative segregation. This decision followed a recommendation in April 2006 from the Deputy Inspector General of the Department of Correctional Services, based on the petitioner posing a danger to facility safety. The determination was upheld after an administrative appeal, leading to this CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court confirmed the administrative segregation, citing the petitioner's criminal history, escape attempts, and minimization of past events as substantial evidence. The court rejected arguments that the segregation constituted double jeopardy or cruel and unusual punishment, and found that the petitioner's good behavior in a special housing unit was not indicative of rehabilitation.

Administrative SegregationInmate SafetyPrison SecurityCPLR Article 78Substantial EvidenceCorrectional FacilitiesDouble JeopardyCruel and Unusual PunishmentRehabilitationPrison Misconduct
References
14
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

Graff v. United Collection Bureau, Inc.

This memorandum and order addresses a class action lawsuit filed by Thomas Graff against United Collection Bureau, Inc. under the FDCPA. The parties sought final certification of a class action and approval of a cy pres settlement. The proposed settlement included payments to a public interest organization, the representative plaintiff, administration costs, and attorneys' fees. However, one class member objected to various aspects, including the scope of the release and the class's geographic scope. The court ultimately denied final approval of the settlement, citing concerns with the broad release, the unexplained expansion of the class size without commensurate benefit, and the exclusive cy pres remedy, while upholding the magistrate judge's jurisdiction. The court also modified the class to be limited solely to the New York class.

Class Action SettlementFDCPA LitigationMagistrate Judge JurisdictionCy Pres RemedyDebt Collection PracticesRule 23(e) ReviewProcedural FairnessSubstantive FairnessScope of ReleaseClass Definition
References
48
Showing 1-10 of 5,808 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