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

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
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Novie

This case concerns the constitutionality of the Village of Montebello's Tree Preservation and Landscape Maintenance Law, under which a defendant was charged for removing trees without a permit. The defendant challenged the law on multiple constitutional grounds including ultra vires, uncompensated taking, due process violations, First Amendment infringement, and equal protection. The Justice Court initially granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the charges. On appeal, the court reversed this decision, upholding the constitutionality of the Tree Law. The court found the law served legitimate governmental purposes, its fees were reasonable, and the defendant's taking and due process claims were not ripe due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The First Amendment and equal protection challenges were also rejected.

Tree Preservation LawConstitutional LawFifth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessTakings ClauseEqual ProtectionFirst AmendmentLocal OrdinancesZoning Law
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zeluck v. Board of Education

The case involves a motion by the Attorney-General to dismiss a petition filed by certain teachers. The teachers sought to enjoin the Superintendent of Schools from implementing payroll deductions mandated by Civil Service Law section 210, also known as the Taylor Law, for their alleged participation in a strike. The petitioners argued the law was unconstitutional, infringing upon rights to free association, speech, and equal protection, and that its payroll deduction provisions constituted a bill of attainder and violated due process. The court, citing precedents, rejected the arguments regarding free association, speech, and equal protection. It also found the due process procedures for payroll deductions sufficient, concluding the law was not a bill of attainder. Therefore, the motion to dismiss was granted.

Taylor LawCivil Service LawPublic Employee StrikesPayroll DeductionsDue ProcessFreedom of AssociationFreedom of SpeechEqual ProtectionConstitutionality of StatuteMotion to Dismiss
References
5
Case No. 1:11-cv-1525
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 24, 2018

N.Y.S. Law Enforcement Officers Union Council 82 v. Cuomo

This case involves a dispute between various New York State employee unions and retired employees (Plaintiffs) against the State of New York and several state officials (Defendants). Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants' unilateral increase in health insurance contribution rates for active and retired employees violated their rights under the Contracts Clause and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. and New York State Constitutions, and constituted a breach of contract and violation of Civil Service Law § 167. Plaintiffs also challenged the constitutionality of Chapter 491 of the Laws of 2011. The Court granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding that the collective bargaining agreements did not establish a contractual right to perpetually fixed health insurance premium contribution rates, and therefore no substantial impairment of contract occurred. Even if there were an impairment, the Court found the state's actions were a reasonable and necessary response to a significant fiscal crisis. The Court also dismissed Plaintiffs' due process and state law claims, including the breach of contract and ultra vires claims, concluding that no protected property interest existed in fixed contribution rates, and adequate state remedies were available.

Contracts ClauseDue ProcessHealth Insurance PremiumsRetiree BenefitsCollective Bargaining AgreementCivil Service LawSummary JudgmentFiscal CrisisState EmployeesPublic Sector Unions
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Howell v. County of Albany

A correction officer's General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits were suspended by the Albany County Sheriff after he refused a light duty assignment following a workplace injury in September 2009. The officer initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, alleging due process violations because the Hearing Officer supposedly refused to consider proof of post-traumatic stress disorder and relied on evidence outside the record. The Court determined that the petitioner was afforded due process, noting that a predetermination hearing was held where he presented witnesses and cross-examined the respondents'. The Court found no violation of procedural due process as the petitioner did not raise a genuine dispute regarding his PTSD diagnosis before the hearing. Ultimately, the Court confirmed the determination to suspend benefits and dismissed the petition.

Due ProcessGeneral Municipal Law 207-cLight Duty AssignmentDisability BenefitsCorrection OfficerAdministrative HearingProcedural Due ProcessWorkers' Compensation ClaimPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderCredibility Assessment
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 08, 1985

Levensen v. Berkey Professional Processing, Inc.

The plaintiff, a route driver for Berkey Film Processing of New Jersey, Inc., was injured after falling on ice in a parking lot owned by Berkey Professional Processing, Inc. He initiated a negligence action against Professional and McCune Maintenance Company. Professional asserted that the action was barred by Workers’ Compensation Law § 11, arguing that both entities were divisions of the sole surviving corporation, Berkey Photo, Inc., following mergers. The court upheld Professional's defense, finding the common-law tort action barred due to the corporate structure. However, the complaint against McCune Maintenance Company was reinstated, as McCune was deemed a third-party tortfeasor not immune under the Workers’ Compensation Law.

Negligence ActionPersonal InjuryWorkers' Compensation LawCorporate MergerEmployer ImmunityThird-Party TortfeasorSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewPremises LiabilityCorporate Veil
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mawhirt v. Ahmed

Kingsley Maw-hirt initiated this action on September 27, 1996, alleging violations of his procedural and substantive due process rights, as well as state law claims for false imprisonment and assault and battery, stemming from two involuntary psychiatric admissions to the University Hospital at Stony Brook in 1995. The District Court, presided over by Judge Spatt, converted the defendants' motions to dismiss into motions for summary judgment. The Court granted all motions, dismissing the complaint in its entirety, finding that the plaintiff was afforded procedural due process under New York State Mental Hygiene Law and that the individual state and county defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for their objectively reasonable actions in confining and treating Mawhirt, based on multiple medical evaluations diagnosing paranoid schizophrenia and a substantial risk to himself and others. State law claims for false imprisonment against officers were dismissed due to lack of a notice of claim, while similar claims against doctors were precluded by qualified immunity. The claim for ineffective assistance of counsel was dismissed as court-appointed attorneys do not act under color of state law, and the state law assault and battery claim against Barbara Mawhirt was dismissed due to the court declining supplemental jurisdiction.

Involuntary commitmentPsychiatric treatmentDue process rightsFalse imprisonmentAssault and batteryQualified immunitySummary judgmentPro se plaintiffMental Hygiene LawSchizophrenia
References
52
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Estiverne v. Esernio-Jenssen

The case involves a lawsuit against a doctor and hospitals concerning the detention and testing of an infant (A.E.) for suspected child abuse, and their role in the subsequent removal of all infant children from parental custody. Plaintiffs alleged constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, including procedural and substantive due process, and Fourth Amendment rights, alongside New York state common law claims for false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, medical malpractice, and gross negligence. The court granted summary judgment on procedural due process, § 1983 malicious prosecution, state law malicious prosecution, and unlawful imprisonment claims, and dismissed substantive due process claims related to A.E.'s hospital detention. However, the court denied summary judgment for Infant Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claims, all plaintiffs’ substantive due process claims related to the court-ordered removal, and Infant Plaintiffs’ medical malpractice and gross negligence claims, deeming these suitable for trial.

child abusecivil rightsSection 1983Fourth AmendmentFourteenth Amendmentmedical malpracticegross negligencesummary judgmentqualified immunityparental rights
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Henry v. Bass-Masci

Claimant, a home health aide for Beatrice Bass, sustained injuries in a bus accident and sought workers' compensation benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found Elizabeth Bass-Masci, who paid claimant, to be the employer and liable under the Workers' Compensation Law. This determination was affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. Bass-Masci appealed, alleging claimant violated Workers’ Compensation Law § 114-a by making false statements and that her due process rights were violated. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the conclusion that claimant did not violate § 114-a due to memory loss, and that the due process argument was waived due to an untimely request. Other contentions regarding claimant's withdrawal from the workforce and the identity of the employer were deemed unpreserved for review.

Home health aideBus accidentWork-related injuryEmployer liabilityWorkers' Compensation benefitsFalse statementsDue process rightsCross-examinationMedical evidenceMemory loss
References
7
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
8
Showing 1-10 of 21,011 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