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

MacK v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

Plaintiff Michael Mack sued The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Dr. Scott Bergman for racial discrimination, hostile work environment, and wrongful termination under 42 U.S.C. sections 1981 and 1983, and New York Executive Law section 296. Mack, an African-American employee, alleged his supervisor, Iannacone, and Dr. Bergman subjected him to racial jokes, disparate treatment, and a hostile work environment. Mack was terminated after failing a drug test and refusing to provide a second urine sample, which he claimed was racially motivated. The defendants moved for summary judgment. The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, dismissing all claims, finding that Mack failed to demonstrate a municipal policy or custom for the Port Authority's liability and did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claims of wrongful termination or a racially hostile work environment. Additionally, state law claims were dismissed as New York anti-discrimination laws do not apply to the bi-state Port Authority.

Racial DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentWrongful TerminationSummary Judgment42 U.S.C. Section 198142 U.S.C. Section 1983Port AuthorityBi-State AgencyMunicipal LiabilityDrug Testing
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 04, 1996

Javid v. Scott

Plaintiffs Eleanor Javid (as administratrix of Tige Javid's estate) and Kamal and Eleanor Javid (Tige's parents) filed a § 1983 action against Officer Edward Scott and the Village of Monroe, alleging excessive deadly force by Scott and inadequate screening/training policies by the Village. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Scott's actions were shielded by qualified immunity and the Village had no valid § 1983 claim against it. The court denied summary judgment regarding claims against Scott, citing genuine issues of material fact concerning the objective reasonableness of his use of deadly force. Initially deferring consideration of claims against the Village for discovery, the court later dismissed these claims with prejudice after plaintiffs announced their discontinuation. The decision allows the claims against Scott to proceed to trial, while absolving the Village of liability in this specific action.

Excessive forcePolice misconductQualified immunitySummary judgmentFourth AmendmentSection 1983Deadly forceMunicipal liabilityRespondeat superiorConstitutional rights
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 1995

Scott v. Dime Sav. Bank of New York, FSB

The Scotts (Evelyn A. Scott and Leon Scott) sued The Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB (Dime) for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence. A jury found in favor of the Scotts on the breach of fiduciary duty and negligence claims, awarding $36,000, and assigning 54% fault to the Scotts for negligence. The Dime moved for judgment as a matter of law to dismiss these claims and for summary judgment on its counterclaim for mortgage foreclosure. The court denied the Dime's motion to dismiss the breach of fiduciary duty and negligence claims, upholding the jury's verdict due to evidence of a fiduciary relationship beyond a simple debtor-creditor, arising from the Dime's promotion of investments through its affiliate, Invest. The court granted the Dime's motion for foreclosure on the Scotts' mortgage, conditional on Mrs. Scott receiving a life tenancy. The court reasoned that the $36,000 damages pertained to investment losses, not the loan's validity, and the Scotts were in default. The awarded damages were set off against the amounts owed on the counterclaim.

Fiduciary Duty BreachNegligence ClaimsMortgage ForeclosureStock Market InvestmentsGlass-Steagall Act ImplicationsBank Affiliate LiabilityJury Verdict ReviewJudgment as Matter of LawEquitable DefensesPro Se Representation
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians & Employers' Pension Fund v. Steven Scott Enterprises, Inc.

Plaintiffs, the Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians and Employers’ Pension Fund, brought suit against Steven Scott Enterprises, Inc. seeking an audit of payroll records from 1992-1994 to verify pension fund contributions. Steven Scott moved for summary judgment, asserting that fifteen prior settlement agreements with William Moriarity, a Pension Fund Trustee and Local 802 President, fully settled all monetary claims. The court found that Steven Scott reasonably relied on Moriarity's apparent authority, and the Pension Fund's actions, including cashing checks and failing to repudiate the agreements, established equitable estoppel and ratification. Consequently, the court granted Steven Scott's motion for summary judgment, concluding that the Pension Fund was bound by the agreements and dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint.

ERISALMRAPension FundEquitable EstoppelApparent AuthorityRatificationSettlement AgreementsSummary JudgmentEmployer ContributionsUnion
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of the Estate of Scott v. R. M. Stevenson Motors, Inc.

Paul W. Scott, a part-time body repairman, died from an injury sustained while working on a car for R. M. Stevenson Motors, Inc. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found an employer-employee relationship, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this, concluding Scott was an independent contractor. R. M. Stevenson Motors, Inc. and its carrier appealed the Board's determination. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial evidence that Scott operated as an independent contractor due to factors like lack of supervision, working on his own schedule, providing his own tools, and receiving a fixed payment upon completion. The court highlighted that no single factor is conclusive in determining an employment relationship.

employment relationshipindependent contractorworkers' compensationaccidental deathscope of employmentcontrol testmethod of paymentfurnishing equipmentright to dischargeappellate review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Perra

Petitioner Scott Perra, on behalf of Faxton-St. Luke’s Healthcare, sought involuntary retention of Theresa Doe for mental health treatment and administration of Risperdal over her objection under Mental Hygiene Law § 9.33. Respondent, a 23-year-old pregnant female diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, refused medication due to pregnancy concerns. Physicians, including Dr. Bahram Omidian and Dr. B.E. Fard, assessed respondent as delusional, disorganized, and a danger to herself and her fetus without treatment. The court found that the petitioner met the burden for involuntary retention, citing respondent's impaired judgment and inability to make rational decisions regarding her health and the fetus. However, the court denied the application to forcibly administer Risperdal, noting the PDR's inconclusive information on fetal effects and upholding principles of autonomy, while permitting reapplication if respondent's condition decompensates. The court also judicially noticed the harmful effects of maternal smoking on a fetus and mandated an aggressive smoking cessation program for the respondent.

Involuntary CommitmentMental Hygiene LawParanoid SchizophreniaForced MedicationRisperdalPregnant PatientFetal HealthPatient AutonomyParens PatriaeInformed Consent
References
8
Case No. ADJ4522242 (VNO 0452421) ADJ522765 (VNO 0452422)
Regular
May 26, 2011

PAUL ALLGOOD vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted lien claimant's petition for removal to rescind an Administrative Law Judge's order compelling Dr. Baden's appearance at trial. The Board found no good cause was established for Dr. Baden's direct examination and that the order was not a final, appealable decision. Removal was granted to prevent prejudice to the lien claimant, and the order for Dr. Baden's appearance was rescinded. The Board also dismissed the lien claimant's prior petition for reconsideration.

Lien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ OrderDr. Scott BadenGood CauseMedical WitnessDirect ExaminationWritten ReportsBoard Rule 10606
References
11
Case No. 525176
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 11, 2018

Matter of Parody v. Old Dominion Frgt. Line

Claimant Scott M. Parody sought workers' compensation benefits after sustaining a right knee injury in December 2013. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially awarded benefits based on a 50% schedule loss of use (SLU) of the right leg, favoring the opinion of an independent medical examiner, Dr. Stewart Kaufman, over the treating orthopedist, Dr. Glenn Axelrod. The Workers' Compensation Board subsequently modified this decision, increasing the SLU award to 55%. The employer appealed, challenging the medical evidence and the application of the New York State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding it consistent with the medical evidence and supported by substantial evidence, as the Board has the discretion to evaluate and credit medical opinions.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseRight Knee InjuryMedical EvidenceAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardGuidelines for Permanent ImpairmentOrthopedic ExaminationMeniscus TearChondromalacia
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 02, 2017

United States v. Scott

Mr. Scott, a 46-year-old African American male from Queens, New York, pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute heroin. He was involved in a drug trafficking organization in Queens. His addiction to heroin stemmed from prescription painkillers for a knee injury. On March 2, 2017, he was sentenced to time-served (approximately 20 months), three years of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment. The court considered the nature of the offense, the defendant's characteristics, and the advisory sentencing guidelines, emphasizing parsimony in incarceration due to the defendant's acceptance of responsibility, stable family, and job prospects.

Conspiracy to DistributeHeroin TraffickingSentencing GuidelinesDrug AddictionPrescription Opioid MisuseSupervised ReleaseCriminal History Category VIAcceptance of ResponsibilityCareer OffenderFederal Sentencing
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Scott v. American Airlines, Inc.

Plaintiffs Marie Scott and Lori Fahs, employees of American Airlines, sought a preliminary injunction to prevent their employer from prohibiting them from wearing Transport Workers Union (TWU) pins and from disciplining them for doing so. The defendant argued that the pins caused disruption to efficiency and customer relations, unlike pins worn by employees of certified unions. However, the court found no rational basis for the employer to forbid agents seeking union recognition from wearing union pins, especially since other unionized employees were permitted to wear them. The court concluded that the employer's actions constituted unlawful interference with the employees' right to organize under the Railway Labor Act and the Labor Management Relations Act, as it interfered with the designation of representatives and employee self-organization. The motion for a preliminary injunction was therefore granted.

Union insigniaPreliminary injunctionLabor lawRailway Labor ActLabor Management Relations ActEmployee rightsUnion organizingWorkplace disciplineEmployer interferenceCollective bargaining
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 1,493 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