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

Kennedy v. Schroeder

The case involves a parent union's action to reclaim property from a local union after revoking its charter without notice or a hearing. The International constitution allowed the president to revoke charters and transfer property, with an appeal process. The lower court found a due process deprivation and unlawful forfeiture. However, the appellate court reversed the summary judgment dismissal, stating that important legal questions regarding property title and due process, especially concerning whether local unions held property in trust for the International, were not adequately developed in the record. Further proof, such as the charter, was deemed necessary to clarify the defendants' property ownership rights.

Union disputeCharter revocationDue processProperty rightsSummary judgmentLocal union propertyParent unionInternational constitutionReplevinForfeiture

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Blouse Workers' Union, Local 23-25 v. South Ocean Sportswear, Inc.

The Union moved to confirm an arbitration award directing South Ocean Sportswear, Inc. to pay $4,175 to Shiu Lun Lee for lost wages due to an unjustified discharge. Initially, an arbitrator sustained Lee's discharge, but later determined that severe translation inaccuracies during the first hearing resulted in a substantial failure of due process, rendering the prior award a nullity. A second hearing was conducted, leading to an award in Lee's favor. South Ocean moved to vacate this second award, arguing the arbitrator lacked power to reopen a final award and to impose damages for the post-first-hearing period. The court, however, found that the arbitrator acted within the broad powers granted by the collective bargaining agreement, including determining arbitrability and procedural matters, and that the arbitrator's findings of fact and conclusions of law were not subject to judicial review. Consequently, the court confirmed the arbitration award and denied South Ocean's application to vacate it.

ArbitrationDue Process ViolationCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitration Award ConfirmationArbitrator AuthorityReopening Arbitration AwardProcedural Due ProcessTranslation ErrorEmployee DischargeLost Wages

References

Case No. 13-15-00312-CV

Regular Panel Decision

May 15, 2015

Brian O'Grady, M.D And the O'Grady Family Partnership, Ltd., as Owners of Claims of David Miller, Brett Schulick and River Oaks Capital Management, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA.

This case involves an appeal by Brian O’Grady, M.D. and The O’Grady Family Partnership, Ltd. (Appellants) against National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, P.A. (Appellee). The Appellants challenged a trial court’s judgment that confirmed an arbitration award. The arbitration panel had found no insurance coverage under a professional liability policy for a FINRA arbitration award against Woodbury Financial Services, Inc.'s agents, Miller and Schulick. The Appellants argue that the arbitration panel exceeded its powers by making improper factual findings at the summary judgment stage, particularly regarding whether Woodbury approved or distributed certain investment products and whether the agents' actions were "dishonest, malicious, or knowingly wrongful," which would trigger an exclusion. They contend these findings were made without coverage-specific discovery or a full evidentiary hearing, thereby denying them due process. The appeal seeks to vacate or modify the portion of the award denying coverage for the "Asset Protection Plan" and remand for a full evidentiary hearing.

AppealArbitrationInsurance CoverageProfessional LiabilitySummary JudgmentArbitrator PowersTexas LawFINRA AwardInvestment ProductsDue Process

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mair-Headley v. County of Westchester

The petitioner, a correction officer, was terminated from her employment by the Westchester County Department of Corrections after being absent for over one year due to a nonoccupational injury, pursuant to Civil Service Law § 73. She challenged this determination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, alleging denial of due process and violation of the Human Rights Law. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the due process claim and transferred the remaining issues to this Court. This Court confirmed the determination, finding that the petitioner received adequate pre-termination notice and a post-termination hearing, satisfying due process. Additionally, the Court concluded that the termination did not violate the Human Rights Law, as employers are not obligated to create new light-duty or permanent light-duty positions for accommodation.

Civil Service LawCPLR Article 78Due ProcessHuman Rights LawEmployment TerminationCorrection OfficerDisability AccommodationWestchester CountyAppellate ReviewPublic Employment

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Lowcher v. Beame

Plaintiff, a former school secretary, initiated a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Board of Estimate of the City of New York, the New York Teachers’ Retirement System, and the New York City Employees’ Retirement System. She alleged deprivation of her constitutional rights to due process and equal protection after her application for accident disability benefits was denied. The Medical Board of the New York Teachers’ Retirement System determined her disability was not proximately caused by a 1970 assault, and denied her requests for legal representation, witnesses, and access to a referred physician's report. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. Judge Metzner denied the motion, ruling that while a full adversarial hearing was not required, the plaintiff was entitled to know the evidence upon which the Retirement System made its determination, implying a due process violation in denying access to the medical report.

Due ProcessEqual ProtectionCivil Rights ActionDisability BenefitsAccident DisabilityAdministrative LawMedical BoardRight to CounselCross-ExaminationAccess to Evidence

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Capone v. Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District

The petitioner, an employee of Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District (UFSD), was terminated after two adult students reported sexually explicit conversations and offers of sexual acts from him. The UFSD charged the petitioner with 18 specifications of misconduct under Civil Service Law §75. Following a hearing where 17 charges were sustained, the hearing officer recommended termination, which the UFSD adopted. The petitioner initiated an article 78 proceeding, arguing insufficient notice, lack of substantial evidence, and an excessively severe penalty. The court confirmed the determination, finding the charges adequate, supported by substantial evidence from student testimonies, and that termination was not disproportionate given precedent, despite the petitioner's previously unblemished 19-year record.

Employment terminationSexual misconductAdministrative reviewCivil Service LawSufficiency of evidencePenalty proportionalityArticle 78Due processHearing officer findingsPublic education employee

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Santo v. Laborers' International Union

This case addresses a dispute between union members and their labor organizations concerning a dues increase implemented during a trusteeship. Plaintiffs challenged the unilateral dues increase by a trustee under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) and the union's constitution. The court found that the trustee's action violated the LMRDA's provision requiring member participation in dues decisions, even under a trusteeship. However, the claim based on the union constitution was dismissed due to the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust internal union remedies. The court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the LMRDA claim and to the defendants on the union constitution claim, leaving the issue of damages unresolved.

LMRDAUnion DuesTrusteeshipLabor Management Reporting and Disclosure ActSummary JudgmentExhaustion of RemediesUnion ConstitutionVoting RightsDemocratic GovernanceLabor Unions

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Local 210 Warehouse & Production Employees Union v. Environmental Services, Inc.

The plaintiffs, Local 210 Warehouse & Production Employees Union and two Unity Welfare Funds, sought to vacate an arbitration ruling by arbitrator Randi Lowitt, which closed their arbitration proceeding against Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) due to delay. ESI counterclaimed to confirm the arbitrator's award. The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement requiring ESI to collect union dues and contribute to the Funds, and to submit disputes to binding arbitration. After multiple rescheduled hearings and periods of inactivity, the arbitrator closed the case in December 2015, finding the Union failed to diligently pursue the arbitration. The District Court denied the plaintiffs' request for vacatur, concluding that the arbitrator did not violate fundamental fairness requirements by closing the case without a full evidentiary hearing, as the plaintiffs had ample notice and failed to respond promptly. The court also found that the arbitrator did not exceed her contractual powers, as the CBA's provisions regarding hearings and 'technical defenses' were ambiguous and her interpretation was at least 'arguably' within her authority. Therefore, the court granted ESI's motion for summary judgment and confirmed the arbitration award.

Arbitration AwardVacaturSummary JudgmentLabor DisputesCollective BargainingFederal Arbitration ActArbitrator AuthorityProcedural FairnessWaiver of ArgumentContract Interpretation

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Franklin v. CROSBY TYPE. CO. & INT'L TYPO. UNION

Plaintiff Morris W. Franklin, a Black individual, sued his former employer, Crosby Typesetting Company, Inc., and his union, International Typographical Union, Local 198, alleging racial discrimination. Franklin claimed he was denied experience credit, unlawfully discharged, and that the union failed to represent him due to his race. The employer asserted Franklin was discharged for cause due to disruptive behavior, specifically slamming type, after repeated warnings. The union contended it couldn't help due to Franklin's untimely grievance. The Court found the plaintiff failed to prove a prima facie case of discrimination, concluding his discharge was for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons and that the union did not discriminate or breach its duty of fair representation. Recovery was denied to the plaintiff.

Employment DiscriminationRacial DiscriminationTitle VIISection 1981Union Duty of Fair RepresentationWrongful TerminationPrima Facie CaseBurden of ProofStatute of LimitationsUntimely Grievance

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Reilly v. Sheet Metal Workers' International Ass'n

Plaintiff Vincent L. Reilly, a member of Local Union No. 137 of the Sheet Metal Workers International Association, sued the International and the Local under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959. Reilly alleged that the union disciplined him in violation of his due process rights after he became involved in an altercation with a local official, Bernard Friedland. The court found multiple due process violations, including the union's failure to serve Reilly with written specific charges via a known effective method, denying him a reasonable time to prepare his defense, and not affording him a full and fair hearing. The union's subsequent appellate procedures, which relied on a tainted record, did not cure these initial defects. Therefore, the court vacated the penalties imposed by the General Executive Council and remanded the case to the Local for a new trial.

Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure ActUnion DisciplineDue ProcessFair HearingWritten ChargesNotice RequirementsInternal Union TrialAppeals ProcessVacated PenaltiesRemand

References

Showing 1-10 of 19,377 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

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

Kennedy v. Schroeder

Union disputeCharter revocationDue processProperty rightsSummary judgmentLocal union propertyParent unionInternational constitutionReplevinForfeiture

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Blouse Workers' Union, Local 23-25 v. South Ocean Sportswear, Inc.

References

Case No. 13-15-00312-CV

Regular Panel Decision

May 15, 2015

Brian O'Grady, M.D And the O'Grady Family Partnership, Ltd., as Owners of Claims of David Miller, Brett Schulick and River Oaks Capital Management, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA.

AppealArbitrationInsurance CoverageProfessional LiabilitySummary JudgmentArbitrator PowersTexas LawFINRA AwardInvestment ProductsDue Process

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mair-Headley v. County of Westchester

Civil Service LawCPLR Article 78Due ProcessHuman Rights LawEmployment TerminationCorrection OfficerDisability AccommodationWestchester CountyAppellate ReviewPublic Employment

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Lowcher v. Beame

Due ProcessEqual ProtectionCivil Rights ActionDisability BenefitsAccident DisabilityAdministrative LawMedical BoardRight to CounselCross-ExaminationAccess to Evidence

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Capone v. Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District

Employment terminationSexual misconductAdministrative reviewCivil Service LawSufficiency of evidencePenalty proportionalityArticle 78Due processHearing officer findingsPublic education employee

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Santo v. Laborers' International Union

LMRDAUnion DuesTrusteeshipLabor Management Reporting and Disclosure ActSummary JudgmentExhaustion of RemediesUnion ConstitutionVoting RightsDemocratic GovernanceLabor Unions

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Local 210 Warehouse & Production Employees Union v. Environmental Services, Inc.

Arbitration AwardVacaturSummary JudgmentLabor DisputesCollective BargainingFederal Arbitration ActArbitrator AuthorityProcedural FairnessWaiver of ArgumentContract Interpretation

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Franklin v. CROSBY TYPE. CO. & INT'L TYPO. UNION

Employment DiscriminationRacial DiscriminationTitle VIISection 1981Union Duty of Fair RepresentationWrongful TerminationPrima Facie CaseBurden of ProofStatute of LimitationsUntimely Grievance

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Reilly v. Sheet Metal Workers' International Ass'n

Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure ActUnion DisciplineDue ProcessFair HearingWritten ChargesNotice RequirementsInternal Union TrialAppeals ProcessVacated PenaltiesRemand

References

Showing 1-10 of 19,377 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.