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

In re the Arbitration Between Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. & Freeman

This case involves Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (CBS) seeking to stay arbitration initiated by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Local 1212 (the Union). The Union cross-moved to compel arbitration concerning video tape recording jurisdiction and alleged violations of their collective bargaining agreement dated May 1, 1958. CBS argued that the Union's demands did not involve specific grievances and were untimely. The court, presided over by William O. Hecht, Jr., J., ruled that the demand for arbitration, including questions of subcontracting within and potentially outside specified territorial limitations and alleged violations of Sections 1.04, 1.05, and 6.01, was arbitrable. The court emphasized the policy of encouraging arbitration and rejected CBS's arguments regarding the specificity of grievances, timeliness, and alleged illegality of certain arbitration items. The motion to stay arbitration was denied, and the cross-motion to compel arbitration was granted for both items.

ArbitrationCollective BargainingLabor LawSubcontractingContract DisputeJurisdictionUnion RightsEmployer ObligationsGrievance ProcedureNational Labor Relations Act
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2006

In re the Arbitration between Mays-Carr & State Farm Insurance

The petitioner appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Erie County, which denied her petition seeking to set aside an arbitration award and to obtain a new hearing before a different arbitrator. The petitioner contended that the arbitrator either exceeded his power or imperfectly executed it, and also alleged partiality, referencing CPLR 7511 (b) (1) (ii), (iii). The court affirmed the lower court's decision, asserting that an arbitrator's power is exceeded only when the award violates strong public policy, is irrational, or explicitly surpasses enumerated limitations. It found the arbitrator's determination, which denied the petitioner an award for economic loss beyond basic economic loss, to be rational and supported by the record, especially given the absence of a serious injury finding. Furthermore, the appellate court dismissed the petitioner's claims of arbitrator bias as speculative, stating that past adverse rulings against her counsel do not inherently establish a lack of impartiality.

Arbitration AwardCPLR Article 75Vacate Arbitration AwardArbitrator ImpartialityExceeded PowerImperfect ExecutionSerious InjuryEconomic LossAppellate ReviewNew York State
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Klikocki & New York Department of Corrections

This appeal concerns the vacatur of an arbitration award. The petitioner sought to overturn the award, alleging that the respondent fraudulently destroyed a crucial key log that would have supported the petitioner's claim of a work-related injury. The arbitration stemmed from the petitioner's discharge for misconduct, specifically for filing a workers' compensation claim for an injury purportedly sustained at work but alleged by a former girlfriend to have occurred while playing frisbee. The court found insufficient clear and convincing evidence of fraud, noting the key log's destruction was part of a routine record disposal and not maliciously intended. Furthermore, the court deemed the log's probative value limited regarding the central issue of the injury's true origin. Consequently, the Supreme Court's order vacating the arbitration award was reversed, the petition dismissed, and the original arbitration award confirmed.

FraudArbitration AwardVacaturWorkers' Compensation ClaimEvidence DestructionCPLR 7511MisconductAppealDue DiligenceKey Log
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nelson v. Biderman

The petitioner moved for a warrant under CPLR 2308(b) to commit the respondent to jail for refusing to be sworn as a witness and produce requested books and records in a pending arbitration proceeding. The respondent had previously unsuccessfully moved to set aside the arbitrator's subpoenas, and the petitioner's cross-motion to compel compliance was granted. An appeal by the respondent for a stay was denied by the Appellate Division. The respondent persisted in his refusal before the arbitrator, leading to the current motion. The respondent argued, for the first time, that only the 'issuer' of the subpoena, the arbitrator, could move for relief under CPLR 2308(b), collaterally attacking the prior order. The court rejected this argument, interpreting 'issuer' to include the party on whose application the subpoena was issued in a non-judicial proceeding, and found it impractical to limit the remedy to the official. The motion was granted.

ArbitrationSubpoena enforcementCPLR 2308(b)CPLR 2302(a)Contempt of courtWitness refusalDocument productionCollateral attackJudicial interpretationMotion to compel
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Willoughby Realty & Management Co. & New York State Independent Union of Building Service Employees & Factory Workers, Local 2

The court reversed a prior order, granting the petitioner's motion to stay arbitration in a dispute between employers and a union. The core issue was the employers' right to lay off employees under a collective bargaining agreement, which required "good faith and sound business judgment." While the union challenged the employers' good faith, the court found insufficient facts presented to raise a genuine issue for arbitration. Therefore, the arbitration was stayed. A dissenting opinion argued that the record contained adequate circumstances to challenge the employer's good faith, warranting arbitration. An appeal from a decision by Justice Conlon dated November 5, 1959, was dismissed on grounds of non-appealability.

Arbitration StayCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee LayoffsEmployer RightsUnion DisputeGood Faith ClauseJudicial ReviewAppellate ReversalDissenting OpinionLabor Law
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re of the Arbitration between Town of Evans & International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Petitioner appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Erie County, which denied its petition to stay arbitration, granted respondent's counterclaim to compel arbitration, and denied both parties' requests for attorney's fees and sanctions. The petitioner had terminated an accountant, Elmar Kiefer, for alleged sexual abuse and misuse of resources. Respondent filed a grievance on Kiefer's behalf, leading to a demand for arbitration under their collective bargaining agreement. Petitioner sought to stay arbitration, arguing it was against public policy as an arbitrator might reinstate Kiefer. The court affirmed the lower court's decision, stating that the public policy argument was premature and that courts should not pre-emptively assume an arbitrator will exceed their powers or violate public policy. The court also denied attorney's fees and sanctions for both parties.

ArbitrationPublic PolicyCollective Bargaining AgreementSexual HarassmentMisconductAttorney's FeesSanctionsAppellate ReviewGrievanceEmployment Termination
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between I. S. Joseph Co. & Toufic Aris & Fils

The Supreme Court affirmed a judgment dismissing Joseph's petition to stay arbitration and granting Toufic's cross-petition to compel arbitration, concurrently vacating an earlier stay pending appeal. The dispute arose from an oral grain sale agreement between Joseph, a Minnesota seller, and Toufic, a buyer from France and Lebanon, where both parties exchanged telex confirmations that largely agreed but had minor differences, and crucially incorporated a North American Export Grain Association (NAEGA) contract containing a broad arbitration clause enforceable in New York. The court determined that a valid agreement to arbitrate existed, asserting that New York law governed the arbitration provision due to its significant contacts, irrespective of the performance location. The majority opinion found the arbitration agreement valid, with some justices viewing it as part of a valid sales contract under UCC 2-207(2)(b), while others deemed the arbitration clause separable. Justice Nunez dissented, arguing for a remand to ascertain the validity of the underlying sales agreement, highlighting telex discrepancies and the non-execution of a formal contract as crucial factors impacting the arbitration agreement's existence.

Arbitration AgreementContract FormationChoice of LawUniform Commercial CodeInternational TradeGrain SaleTelex ConfirmationNAEGA ContractMaterial AlterationSeparability Doctrine
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 26, 1976

In re the Arbitration between S. M. Rose Corp., & Meyers

The Supreme Court, Bronx County, affirmed a judgment denying the employer's application to stay arbitration and granting the union's cross-petition to compel arbitration. The court emphasized the strong federal and state policy favoring arbitration for labor disputes. It ruled that the employer's objections, including those related to subcontracting and consulting employees on repair estimates, were arbitrable as per CPLR 7501, which states courts should not consider the merits of a claim when deciding arbitrability. The court also dismissed the employer's antitrust argument, finding no prima facie showing that the union's proposals would violate antitrust laws.

ArbitrationLabor DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementSubcontractingAntitrust LawArbitrabilityCPLR 7501Court of AppealsAppellate DivisionSupreme Court
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Dworkes & Chalek

This case involves an application by a petitioner to stay arbitration against respondent Chalek, stemming from disputes related to a partnership agreement dated July 18, 1961. The partnership agreement includes an arbitration clause for controversies arising out of the contract. The petitioner argued that the disputes were not subject to arbitration due to unambiguous terms, lack of explicit arbitrator permission for interpretation, and the improper inclusion of an agreement without an arbitration clause. The court found the petitioner's contentions without merit, affirming that while the court determines if an arbitrable dispute exists, the interpretation of a broadly agreed-upon arbitration clause is for the arbitrators. Consequently, the motion to stay arbitration was denied, the petition dismissed, and the parties were directed to proceed to arbitration.

ArbitrationContract InterpretationPartnership DisputeStay of ArbitrationMotion DeniedArbitrabilityScope of ArbitrationAmerican Arbitration AssociationDispute ResolutionJudicial Review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. American Recording & Broadcasting Ass'n

Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (CBS) initiated an action to compel joint arbitration in a work assignment dispute between two unions: American Recording And Broadcasting Association (Association) and Radio & Television Broadcast Engineers Union, Local 1212, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (Local 1212). The Association, representing recording engineers, claimed certain work under its contract with CBS. However, CBS had already assigned this work to Local 1212, representing broadcast technicians, under a separate collective bargaining agreement. CBS demanded arbitration with both unions and consolidation of the arbitrations, which the Association opposed. The court rejected the Association's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of jurisdiction, finding that federal courts have jurisdiction under the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947 to enforce promises to arbitrate. The court emphasized that collective bargaining agreements should be viewed in the context of the employer's entire workforce relationships, making consolidation practicable, economical, and convenient, while avoiding conflicting awards. Consequently, the court granted CBS's motion to consolidate the arbitrations and denied the Association's motion to dismiss.

Labor LawArbitrationWork Assignment DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementUnion DisputeJurisdictionLabor-Management Relations ActConsolidation of ArbitrationNational Labor Relations BoardFederal Court Jurisdiction
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 5,402 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