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. 2015 NY Slip Op 00461 [124 AD3d 475]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 15, 2015

Port Authority of New York & New Jersey v. Port Authority Police Lieutenants Benevolent Ass'n

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a judgment confirming an arbitration award that found the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey violated a collective bargaining agreement by ending free E-Z Pass privileges for retired police sergeants. The court ruled that the arbitrator did not exceed his authority and that his interpretation, which vested retired members with a lifetime interest in these privileges, was not irrational. The decision also clarified that a contractual phrase regarding 'applicable law' pertains to the award's binding nature, not a ground for vacating the award due to a mistake of law.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementE-Z Pass PrivilegesRetired EmployeesArbitrator's AuthorityAppellate ReviewContractual InterpretationLifetime BenefitsJudicial ReviewPublic Authority
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 18, 1995

Transport Workers Union of America v. New York City Transit Authority

The New York City Transit Authority (TA) appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Kings County, which confirmed two arbitration awards dated July 8, 1993, and January 22, 1994, and denied the TA's cross-petition to vacate the latter. The initial award reinstated an employee following a disciplinary grievance, and a supplemental award granted the employee back pay. The TA argued that the Tripartite Arbitration Board exceeded its authority by issuing the supplemental award without adhering to statutory procedures for modifying original awards (CPLR 7509, 7511[c]). The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, vacating the confirmation of the January 22, 1994, award and remitting the case for a hearing. This hearing is necessary to determine if the TA had agreed to resubmit the matter, acquiesced in its submission, and was given an opportunity to be heard, which would impact the validity of the supplemental award.

Arbitration AwardCPLR 7510CPLR 7509CPLR 7511Supplemental AwardVacatur of AwardEmployee Disciplinary GrievanceBack PayModification of AwardJurisdiction of Arbitrator
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Herman & New York City Transit Authority

The petitioners sought to vacate an arbitration award issued by Theodore Kheel, the impartial chairman of the transit industry. Their grievance concerned work pick rules which they claimed violated their seniority status and previous agreements between the Authority and its employees' unions. The arbitrator had denied their grievance, leading the petitioners to allege partiality and misbehavior on his part for consulting the Transport Workers Union. The court, however, found no basis for these charges, noting the informal nature of the arbitration and the arbitrator's prerogative to seek the union's opinion given the potential impact on other employees. Ultimately, the court concluded there was no impartiality or misbehavior and dismissed the petition to vacate the award.

arbitration awardvacate awardpartialitymisbehaviorwork rulesseniority rightsunion agreementgrievanceimpartial chairmanTransit Authority
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 15, 1983

In re the Arbitration between New York City Transit Authority & Transport Workers Union, Local 100

In a proceeding initiated to permanently stay arbitration, the Supreme Court, Kings County, denied the application. The subsequent appeal challenged this denial. Despite some dispute regarding the extent of the Transit Authority's involvement in the arbitration, the appellate court found sufficient evidence of their participation. Consequently, the judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, which denied the application to stay arbitration, was affirmed with costs.

arbitrationappealjudgmentaffirmanceKings CountyTransit Authorityappellate reviewjudicial decisionstay of arbitrationcourt costs
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Jandrew & County of Cortland

Petitioner, a County of Cortland employee, was terminated for failing to maintain a valid driver's license and for failing to disclose a prior conviction on job applications. The petitioner's grievance was submitted to binding arbitration, resulting in an award for reinstatement with back pay and benefits. The County appealed the Supreme Court's order confirming the arbitration award, arguing issues of arbitrability, the arbitrator exceeding authority, and public policy violations. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's order, ruling that the County waived its right to contest arbitrability by participating in arbitration and that the arbitrator's decision did not exceed authority or violate public policy.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceEmployee TerminationDriver's LicenseUndisclosed ConvictionArbitrabilityPublic PolicyWaiverCivil Service Law
References
21
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 01785
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 2017

Henvill v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Winston Henvill appealed the dismissal of his complaint and the denial of his petition to vacate an arbitration award, which resulted in the termination of his employment. The Supreme Court had granted defendants' motion to dismiss Henvill's complaint and denied his petition seeking to vacate the arbitration award based on a finding of misconduct. Henvill argued that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police Benevolent Association (PBA) breached its duty of fair representation and that the arbitrator's fact-finding was irrational. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decisions, finding no evidence that the PBA's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Furthermore, the court emphasized that judicial review of arbitration awards is limited to statutory grounds and does not permit reviewing the arbitrator's findings of fact.

Breach of Duty of Fair RepresentationArbitration AwardEmployment TerminationMisconductCPLR Article 75Vacatur of Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementAppellate ReviewJudicial Review of ArbitrationLabor Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 1996

Suffolk County Water Authority v. Local 393, Utility Workers Union of America

The Suffolk County Water Authority appealed a Supreme Court judgment that confirmed an arbitration award. The arbitration award had modified a penalty imposed by the Authority on an employee from dismissal to a one-year suspension for disconnecting a water meter. The Authority argued this modification violated public policy. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, concluding that the Authority failed to establish public policy considerations or its own rules warranting court intervention to vacate the award.

Arbitration Award VacaturEmployee DisciplinePublic Policy ChallengeAppellate Court DecisionCPLR 7511Judicial Review of ArbitrationSuffolk CountyEmployee MisconductWater AuthorityArbitrator's Power
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 1981

Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority v. Local 100, Transport Workers Union of America

The Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority (MABSTOA) appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Kings County, which dismissed its petition to vacate an arbitration award. The arbitration stemmed from a dispute with Local 100, Transport Workers Union of America, regarding MABSTOA's proposed increase in "swing runs" within a new schedule. Arbitrator Theodore Kheel found an existing arrangement limiting swing runs and deferred the implementation of MABSTOA's changes, despite the changes not imperiling health or safety. MABSTOA argued the arbitrator exceeded his power under CPLR 7511 by ruling on matters beyond health and safety. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, concluding the arbitrator acted within his authority under a broad arbitration clause, particularly by considering the parties' 13-year past practices, and that the award was not irrational or a rewriting of the agreement.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementVacate Arbitration AwardArbitrator's PowerExceeded PowerSwing RunsScheduling DisputePast PracticesIndustrial Common LawCPLR 7511
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between International Brotherhood of America & Castwell Foundry Corp.

Petitioner moved to confirm an arbitration award against a named respondent and Controlled Castings Corp., alleging agreement violations and that Controlled Castings Corp. was a 'runaway shop' of the respondent. Controlled Castings Corp. cross-moved to vacate the award, arguing lack of notice and that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by making an award against a non-party. The court found that the arbitrator could determine the identity of interest for the respondent's liability but lacked authority to impose liability on Controlled Castings Corp. as it was not a party to the arbitration. Consequently, the motion to confirm was granted only against the respondent, and the cross-motion to vacate the award against Controlled Castings Corp. was granted.

Arbitration AwardCorporate Alter EgoRunaway ShopArbitrator JurisdictionDue ProcessNon-Party LiabilityContractual ArbitrationMotion to ConfirmMotion to VacateLabor Disputes
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 12, 2013

Port Authority of New York & New Jersey v. Port Authority Police Sergeants Benevolent Ass'n

The Supreme Court of New York County affirmed an arbitration award dated February 11, 2013, which found that the petitioner violated a collective bargaining agreement by eliminating free E-Z Pass privileges for retired police sergeants. The court ruled that the arbitrator did not exceed authority, as the agreement incorporated a 1973 instruction granting lifetime EZ-Pass privileges to retirees. The court further clarified that the contractual phrase "in accordance with applicable law" refers to the binding nature of the arbitral award, not a ground for vacating the award due to a mistake of law. The decision was made by Justice Cynthia S. Kern and was unanimously concurred by the appellate panel.

Collective bargaining agreementE-Z Pass privilegesArbitration awardRetired employeesJudicial reviewArbitrator authorityContract interpretationLabor disputeMemorandum of AgreementAppellate Division concurrence
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 3,804 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