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

TTL Distribution, Inc. v. Local 99, Office & Distribution Employees Union

This case concerns a dispute between TTL Distribution, Inc. (formerly Ups 'N Downs, Inc.), an employer, and the Office and Distribution Employees’ Union Local 99, I.L.G.W.U. The employer sought to vacate an arbitration award, while the Union moved to confirm it. The underlying arbitration stemmed from Ups 'N Downs' decision to close its warehouse and terminate employees after selling its retail stores, without ensuring the buyer assumed contractual obligations under their collective bargaining agreement. The arbitrator ruled in favor of the Union, ordering back pay, vacation pay, and fund contributions. The District Court upheld the arbitrator's decision, emphasizing the broad scope of arbitration in labor relations and confirming the award.

Arbitration AwardLabor DisputeUnion ContractCollective BargainingEmployer SaleEmployee TerminationContractual ObligationsJudicial DeferenceFederal Arbitration ActLabor Management Relations Act
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gohr Distributing Co. v. Teamsters Local 264

Gohr Distributing Co. discharged employee William Greene, a member of Teamsters Local #264, in April 1986. Greene filed a grievance which was denied. He then sued Gohr and Teamsters, alleging wrongful discharge and breach of fair representation, respectively. Teamsters later demanded arbitration of Greene's discharge, which Gohr initially agreed to but then withdrew. Gohr subsequently moved for a preliminary injunction to prevent arbitration, arguing it was untimely under the six-month statute of limitations from the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 160(b). Teamsters opposed, arguing their demand was not untimely and filed a cross-motion to compel arbitration. The court consolidated the preliminary injunction motion with a trial on the merits and found that arbitration was barred by the six-month statute of limitations, granting Gohr's motion for a permanent injunction and denying Teamsters' cross-motion.

Preliminary InjunctionArbitrationLabor DisputeStatute of LimitationsNational Labor Relations ActCollective Bargaining AgreementWrongful DischargeDuty of Fair RepresentationFederal PolicySix-Month Rule
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 02, 2015

Matter of Mangan v. Try-It Distributing Co., Inc.

In 2000, Tracy Mangan, an employee of Try-It Distributing Co., Inc., suffered a work-related back injury. He was later classified with a permanent partial disability, and liability for his claim was transferred to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases. His average weekly wage was established at $813.49. Mangan passed away in July 2012 due to complications from causally-related back surgery. Subsequently, his widow, the claimant, filed a claim for death benefits. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially determined that benefits should be calculated based on the decedent's average weekly wage at the time of his death. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board modified this decision, ruling that the calculation should be based on the average weekly wage at the time of the 2000 accident. The claimant appealed this modification, but the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 14 and 16(5)(4) which support calculating death benefits based on the average weekly wage at the date of accident or disablement.

Death BenefitsAverage Weekly WagePermanent Partial DisabilitySpecial Fund for Reopened CasesWork-Related InjuryDate of AccidentDate of DeathAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardCalculation of Benefits
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 03, 2004

Ulloa v. Universal Music and Video Distribution Corp.

Plaintiff Demme Ulloa initiated legal action against Universal Music and Video Distribution Corp., Island Def Jam Music Group, Roc-A-Fella Records, LLC, and Shawn Carter, alleging copyright infringement, false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, unjust enrichment, joint authorship, and an accounting of sales. Ulloa claimed to have spontaneously created a vocal counter-melody for Shawn Carter's song "Izzo (H.O.V.A.)" which was later used without proper credit or compensation. The Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the claims of joint authorship and Lanham Act violations, dismissing them. However, it denied both parties' motions for summary judgment regarding copyright infringement, citing unresolved factual disputes concerning originality, work-for-hire status, and implied license. Additionally, the defendants' motions to dismiss the unjust enrichment claim and to bifurcate the trial were denied.

Copyright InfringementLanham ActUnjust EnrichmentJoint AuthorshipSummary JudgmentWork for HireImplied LicenseMusical CompositionSound RecordingOriginality
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Allstate Insurance v. Superintendent of Insurance

The appellate court affirmed the decision against a claimant/objector who sought a share in a dividend distribution from a liquidation proceeding. The court determined that the claimant had no "vested right" to the dividends because their claim was never "allowed" or formally approved by a court order, distinguishing the initial distribution order from a final one. Furthermore, the decision clarified that the retroactive application of Insurance Law § 7434, which revised the priority scheme for asset distribution in liquidations, did not unconstitutionally impair any alleged prior rights. The court emphasized that the Legislature acted in the public interest by enacting a more equitable distribution scheme and that the claimant held merely an expectation, not an absolute right. Consequently, all remaining contentions by the claimant/objector were found unavailing.

Insurance LawLiquidationDividend DistributionVested RightsRetroactive ApplicationStatutory InterpretationAppellate DecisionNew York LawPublic InterestClaims Allowance
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Viviano v. Allard

This case involves a postjudgment application for equitable distribution of a class action settlement by a former wife against her former husband. The parties were divorced in 1984, with all known marital property having been distributed. The husband became a member of a class action lawsuit against Continental Can Company, where his employment was terminated prior to the divorce, leading to a substantial monetary settlement in 1990. The wife, learning of this settlement in 1992, filed for equitable distribution, arguing the proceeds constituted marital property. The Supreme Court ordered a hearing, finding that the settlement proceeds, if known at the time of divorce, would have been considered marital property. The appellate court affirmed this decision, citing unusual circumstances where an asset was unknown to both parties at the time of the divorce, thereby justifying an opportunity for the wife to litigate the issue. The court held that benefits earned during the marriage, even if realized post-divorce, could be subject to equitable distribution.

Divorce LawEquitable DistributionMarital PropertyClass Action SettlementPostjudgment ReliefRes Judicata ExceptionAppellate ReviewUnforeseen AssetsDeferred CompensationFamily Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Goudreau v. Goudreau

This case details an appeal from a Supreme Court judgment concerning the equitable distribution of marital property and the denial of maintenance in a divorce action. The parties, married in 1978, had two children. The plaintiff worked in the defendant's contracting business without pay before developing a work-related partial disability and receiving workers' compensation benefits. The defendant's primary income came from his contracting business, and the couple acquired three parcels of real property during their marriage. The Supreme Court granted a divorce, distributed assets, and denied maintenance to both parties. On appeal, the court affirmed the equitable distribution, deeming it fair. However, the appellate court reversed the denial of maintenance, remitting the case for a new trial on that issue. This reversal was based on the Supreme Court's failure to provide a reasoned analysis for its decision, as required by Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (b), and concerns regarding the imputation of income to the plaintiff without adequately considering her partial disability or providing a factual basis for the calculation.

DivorceEquitable DistributionMarital PropertyMaintenanceSpousal SupportImputed IncomeWorkers' Compensation BenefitsPartial DisabilityAppellate ReviewRemittal
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Paulsen v. Lehman

Mitch Paulsen, director of Mitch Paulsen Outreaches, sought a preliminary injunction against the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (SOP) after his request to distribute religious pamphlets at Jones Beach State Park on September 1, 1990 (Labor Day weekend) was denied. SOP cited a policy of not issuing permits on holiday weekends due to staffing shortages and strained resources. The Court, presided over by District Judge Spatt, found that SOP failed to establish a legitimate governmental interest for a total ban on leaflet distribution and that the alternative channels of communication offered were inadequate. Consequently, the Court granted Paulsen's application for a preliminary injunction, ordering SOP to issue a permit allowing him and two associates to distribute literature in the mosaic area of Jones Beach on September 1, 1990, from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., with a condition for cleanup. The ruling was limited to this specific request, without determining the constitutionality of the overall holiday weekend policy.

First AmendmentPreliminary InjunctionFreedom of SpeechReligious ExpressionPublic Forum DoctrineJones Beach State ParkPermit DenialContent NeutralityNarrow TailoringAlternative Channels of Communication
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Turner v. Turner

After a 30-year marriage, the plaintiff wife initiated a divorce action in August 1991, seeking equitable distribution of marital property. The Supreme Court's initial distribution, which allocated approximately 62% of assets to the defendant and 38% to the plaintiff without explanation, was appealed by the plaintiff for equal division. The appellate court concurred, mandating equal division of net rental income and marital residence proceeds. Furthermore, recognizing the significant disparity in their retirement plans and the plaintiff's limited contribution period, the court ruled she was entitled to an equitable share of the defendant's pension. The plaintiff was also granted reimbursement for a $4,410 Workers' Compensation award confiscated by the defendant without proper offset proof. The judgment was modified and the matter remitted for property redistribution and consideration of counsel fees.

Equitable DistributionMarital PropertyDivorceWorkers' CompensationPension DivisionRental IncomeSpousal SupportMarital AssetsReimbursementCounsel Fees
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 25, 1993

Claim of Williams v. Metropolitan Distribution

Richard Williams, an employee of Metropolitan Distribution, suffered a fatal cardiac arrest at his workplace before his official start time on April 5, 1989. His death was unwitnessed, leading to the application of the presumption under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1) that the death arose out of and in the course of employment. Both the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board found in favor of the claimant, decedent's widow. Metropolitan Distribution appealed, attempting to rebut the presumption with speculative testimony from an assistant manager and a physician, suggesting no work-related stress. However, the Board rejected this testimony, concluding that the death may have resulted from work activity or stress, and its decision was subsequently affirmed on appeal.

Workers' Compensation BoardCardiac ArrestUnwitnessed DeathCourse of EmploymentPresumption of CausationRebuttal of PresumptionWork-Related StressEmployer AppealBoard Decision AffirmedDecedent Death
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 672 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