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
Aug 07, 1984

Murtaugh v. Bankers Trust Co.

In November 1978, claimant Murtaugh filed a discrimination claim against Bankers Trust Company of Albany, N. A. following her 1977 dismissal, citing Workers’ Compensation Law § 241. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed a discrimination finding, which was subsequently upheld by the Appellate Division. An administrative law judge directed Murtaugh's reinstatement and awarded back wages from January 1, 1978, to October 19, 1982, with an offset for unemployment benefits. The Bank appealed this decision, contending the back pay award was unauthorized under Workers’ Compensation Law § 120, arguing Murtaugh failed to accept reemployment or mitigate damages. The court found substantial evidence that no bona fide reemployment offer was made and that the issue of mitigation of damages was not properly raised. Consequently, the court affirmed the Board's decision, upholding Murtaugh's entitlement to back pay.

Workers' Compensation LawDiscriminationBack Pay AwardReinstatementMitigation of DamagesUnemployment BenefitsOffer of ReemploymentAppellate DivisionNew York LawEmployer Liability
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State Correctional Officer & Police Benevolent Ass'n v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Elsie Pierre, a correction officer, sustained a work-related injury in May 2004, leading to workers’ compensation leave. Respondent Department of Correctional Services initiated termination proceedings, but a medical evaluation by respondent's designated physician on September 15, 2005, found her unfit for duty. Pierre's physician, Sanford Wert, later cleared her for work on June 12, 2006, a finding supported by a Hearing Officer who recommended reinstatement with retroactive pay. Respondent, however, rejected the full retroactive award, granting pay only from October 12, 2007, arguing that Pierre had not properly exhausted administrative remedies for the earlier date and that an independent evaluation was lacking. Petitioners challenged this limited retroactive pay, but the Court confirmed the respondent's determination, dismissing the petition and upholding the October 12, 2007, start date for back pay.

Workers' Compensation LeaveRetroactive Back PayCivil Service LawAdministrative ReviewFitness for DutyMedical Evaluation DisputeCorrection Officer EmploymentCPLR Article 78 ProceedingJudicial DiscretionAppellate Court Decision
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cott Corp. v. Levinger

In this appeal, Cott Corporation sought to vacate an arbitration award that granted back pay to a former employee, Lindberg Hall, who was discharged for falsifying time cards. The initial judgment by the Supreme Court, Westchester County, modified the arbitration award by deleting the back pay portion, siding with Cott's argument that the arbitrator exceeded his authority. However, the appellate court reversed this judgment, finding that the arbitrator's decision that Hall was 'not guilty' of dishonesty, as defined by the collective bargaining agreement, justified the award of back pay. The appellate court concluded that the arbitration award was proper and reinstated it, denying Cott's application to vacate the award.

Arbitration AwardVacate JudgmentBack PayCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee DischargeTime Card FalsificationDishonesty ClauseReinstatement DeniedAppellate ReversalArbitrator Authority
References
1
Case No. 267 AD2d 668
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 1999

In re the Arbitration between Civil Service Employees Ass'n & State

This case involves an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court concerning two proceedings. Proceeding No. 1, initiated by Civil Service Employees Association, Inc., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO (CSEA) on behalf of Garmon Carnibucci, sought to confirm an arbitration award regarding the restoration of sick leave accruals for Carnibucci, who was terminated by the Division For Youth (DFY) under Civil Service Law § 71. Proceeding No. 2, commenced by Carnibucci, sought to hold DFY in contempt for allegedly failing to comply with a prior judgment mandating back pay and benefits. The Supreme Court confirmed the arbitration award and found no contempt, prompting an appeal from the petitioners. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal in proceeding No. 1, determining that CSEA was not an aggrieved party since the relief it sought (confirmation of the award) was granted. In proceeding No. 2, the court affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, finding no error in the appointment of a Referee to assess back pay calculations and concluding that DFY was not in contempt due to the lack of specificity in the prior judgment regarding the computation of back pay.

arbitration awardback pay disputesick leave accrualscontempt proceedingCPLR Article 75CPLR Article 78Civil Service Lawpublic employmentworkers' compensation boardjudicial review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Darrell W. Garza/Phelps Dodge Refining Corp. v. Phelps Dodge Refining Corp.

Darrell W. Garza was terminated by Phelps Dodge Refining Corp. for violating a safety rule. He pursued arbitration, leading to an award of reinstatement with a thirty-day leave without pay, but without explicit mention of back pay or offsets. Garza then filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the arbitration award and an award of back pay. The trial court confirmed the award and granted back pay with an offset for interim earnings. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment regarding back pay, concluding that the trial court lacked the authority to modify or interpret the arbitration award to include back pay or offsets because neither party sought clarification or modification within the statutory ninety-day period. The court rendered judgment confirming the original arbitration award as written.

arbitrationemployment lawwrongful terminationback payinterim earningsjudicial reviewarbitration awardFederal Arbitration ActTexas General Arbitration Actaward modification
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Washington Heights—West Harlem—Inwood Mental Health Council, Inc. v. District 1199, National Union of Hospital & Health Care Employees, RWDSU

This District Court opinion addresses motions by the Washington Heights Mental Health Council to amend its complaint and by District 1199 to enforce an arbitration award. Previously, the court vacated an award reinstating Edward Lane with back pay, but the Second Circuit reversed and remanded. The court now finds an oral collective bargaining agreement existed, generally requiring enforcement of the arbitration award. However, new serious allegations against Lane, if proven, could justify discharge. A strong public policy against reinstating a mental health worker accused of sexually molesting patients warrants staying his reinstatement pending arbitration of these new claims. Despite this, the court orders the Council to comply with the back pay portion of the arbitration award, finding no public policy violation in that aspect.

Arbitration Award EnforcementCollective Bargaining AgreementBack PayReinstatement StayedSexual Misconduct AllegationsPublic Policy ExceptionLabor DisputeAmended ComplaintFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureRemand Order
References
11
Case No. No. 08-07-00079-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 21, 2008

Darrell W. Garza/Phelps Dodge Refining Corp. v. Phelps Dodge Refining Corp./Darrell W. Garza

Darrell W. Garza, an employee of Phelps Dodge Refining Corp., was terminated for violating a safety rule, prompting him to pursue an employment arbitration. The arbitrator found no good cause for termination, mandating a 30-day unpaid leave and reinstatement, but did not mention back pay. Garza subsequently moved to confirm the award in trial court, seeking back wages, while Phelps Dodge cross-appealed against any back pay award. The trial court initially awarded Garza back pay with an offset for interim earnings, which both parties challenged on appeal. The appellate court reversed the trial court's back pay award, concluding that the trial court lacked authority to add terms not explicitly stated in the arbitrator's original, ambiguous award, thereby rendering judgment to confirm the arbitration award as originally written.

ArbitrationEmployment DisputeBack PayOffsetFederal Arbitration ActTexas General Arbitration ActAppellate ReviewJudicial AuthorityArbitrator's AwardReinstatement
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Wagner & Russeks Fifth Avenue, Inc.

The court denied a motion to confirm an arbitration award due to improper acknowledgment under Civil Practice Act § 1460. The respondent's cross-motion to vacate the award was granted. While arguments regarding exhausted arbitrator powers and excessive damages were rejected, the court found the arbitrator guilty of "misbehavior" under Civil Practice Act § 1462(3) due to an unreasonable delay in rendering the decision. This delay, from March 3 to August 20, 1948, prejudiced the employer by awarding substantial back pay to a rightfully discharged employee for a period largely covered by the arbitrator's inaction. The matter was remitted to the arbitrator for a rehearing to reassess back pay, which should not extend beyond the date a prompt decision was due.

ArbitrationAward ConfirmationAward VacaturCivil Practice ActArbitrator MisconductUndue DelayLabor AgreementBack PayDeed AcknowledgmentReal Property Law
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State Division of Human Rights v. Parkview Auto Sales, Inc.

The court granted in part the petition to annul a determination by the New York State Division of Human Rights. While substantial evidence supported the compensatory damages award for mental anguish and humiliation, the back pay award of $25,620 was vacated. The back pay calculation was based on projections rather than actual salary and benefits of a co-worker and failed to account for unemployment compensation received by the complainant. The matter was remitted to the Division to properly determine the back pay amount, reduced by unemployment compensation, and to conduct a hearing if advised. The Division's petition to enforce the determination was granted except for the vacated back pay award.

Human Rights LawCompensatory DamagesBack PayMental AnguishHumiliationUnemployment BenefitsRemittiturJudicial ReviewAdministrative LawEmployment Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hotel, Motel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders Union, Local 471 v. P. & J.G. Enterprises, Inc.

The Hotel, Motel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders Union, Local 471, AFL-CIO, petitioned the court to confirm two arbitration awards against P. & J.G. Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a The Albany Thruway House. The dispute arose from the employer's discharge of two employees, Ann Russo and Mary O’Brien, who were members of the Union's collective bargaining unit. The first arbitration award, dated June 15, 1988, found the discharges were not for just cause and ordered reinstatement with back wages. Following the employer's failure to pay back wages despite reinstatement, a second arbitration award, dated September 14, 1989, quantified the back wages for the two employees. The employer contested the confirmation, citing lack of evidentiary support for the arbitrator's decision, alleged partiality of the arbitrator, and financial inability to pay the awards. The court, applying a limited scope of review for arbitration awards, rejected all of the employer's arguments. Ultimately, the court confirmed both arbitration awards and ordered the employer to pay the back wages, along with costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the Union, finding the employer's refusal to comply unjustified.

Arbitration awardLabor Management Relations ActCollective bargaining agreementBack wagesEmployee dischargeJust causeAttorney's feesJudicial reviewArbitrator partialityFinancial inability
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 14,737 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