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
Jan 07, 1994

Williams v. UNITED AUTO WORKERS LOCAL 501

George A. Williams, laid off by Bell Aerospace Wheatfield in October 1992, initiated a "hybrid" action under § 301 of the LMRA. He alleged breaches of the collective bargaining agreement by Bell, a breach of the duty of fair representation by Local 501, its officials, and the International Union, and a conspiracy claim. Defendants moved for dismissal and summary judgment, arguing Williams failed to exhaust internal union remedies. The court denied the defendants' motion, finding that Williams' failure to exhaust internal union remedies was excused due to the uncertainty of available remedies and the union's lack of guidance. The court deferred rulings on other issues.

Labor Management Relations ActHybrid ActionExhaustion of Union RemediesDuty of Fair RepresentationCollective Bargaining AgreementSummary Judgment MotionGrievance ProcedureUnion HostilitySeniority RightsJob Merger Agreement
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. Harris

Plaintiff Robert Jones, an incarcerated individual at Sing Sing, initiated this action alleging his cell was searched multiple times in retaliation for exercising First Amendment rights and in violation of his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, along with various property deprivations. Defendants, including correctional officers Harris and Allen, and Superintendent Marshall, moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and to state a claim. The court granted dismissal of plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims related to cell searches and alleged sexual harassment, as well as First Amendment retaliation claims concerning cell searches, property destruction, and false misconduct reports, citing insufficient factual allegations or failure to meet constitutional thresholds. However, the court denied dismissal of plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process claim regarding the deprivation of three specific items of property against defendants Allen and Marshall, requesting further legal briefing on questions concerning the exhaustion of administrative remedies and access to post-deprivation procedures. Motions filed by the plaintiff for summary judgment and in limine were denied; the former as futile due to lack of exhaustion or constitutional violation, and the latter as premature.

Prisoner RightsFirst AmendmentEighth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessRetaliationCell SearchProperty DeprivationQualified ImmunityAdministrative Remedies
References
45
Case No. 2015-2418 K C
Regular Panel Decision
May 25, 2018

Remedial Med. Care, P.C. v. Park Ins. Co.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Civil Court concerning first-party no-fault benefits. The defendant, Park Insurance Co., sought summary judgment to dismiss the complaint filed by Remedial Medical Care, P.C., as assignee of Thomas Brown. The Civil Court initially denied the motion but found that the defendant had established timely mailing of denials. The Appellate Term modified the order, granting summary judgment to the defendant for a bill of services rendered on August 23, 2012, as it was paid according to the workers' compensation fee schedule. However, for the remaining bills, the defendant failed to prove timely mailing of IME scheduling letters, thus failing to demonstrate that the IMEs were properly scheduled or that the assignor failed to appear. Therefore, the denial of summary judgment for the remaining claims was affirmed.

Summary JudgmentNo-Fault BenefitsIndependent Medical Examination (IME)Timely MailingWorkers' Compensation Fee ScheduleAppellate TermCivil CourtDenial of ClaimFirst-Party BenefitsInsurance Law
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 15, 2018

Matter of Center for Discovery, Inc. v. NYC Dept. of Educ.

The Center for Discovery, Inc. appealed a lower court's dismissal of its CPLR article 78 petition against the NYC Department of Education. Petitioner sought reimbursement for additional, mandated services provided to a student with autism, which NYCDE refused to cover. The Supreme Court had dismissed the case, citing a failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that NYCDE's definitive refusal to pay constituted an exhaustion of administrative remedies. The matter is remanded to the Supreme Court to determine if NYCDE must reimburse The Center for Discovery for the services it explicitly required.

Education LawSpecial EducationIndividualized Education PlanAdministrative LawReimbursement DisputeCPLR Article 78Appellate ReviewAutism Spectrum DisorderChildren with DisabilitiesGovernment Liability
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cole-Hatchard v. McCall

The petitioner, a Town of Clarkstown Police Department member, was injured in 1997 and subsequently denied accidental disability, performance of duty disability, and General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits. This proceeding challenged the Comptroller's denial of retirement system service credit for the period the petitioner received workers’ compensation benefits. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, citing the petitioner's failure to exhaust administrative remedies, as a hearing for redetermination was granted. The court also dismissed claims against municipal respondents, affirming the Comptroller's exclusive authority in such matters. The judgment was affirmed on appeal, upholding the dismissal due to non-exhaustion of administrative remedies.

retirement benefitsservice creditworkers' compensationadministrative remediesexhaustion of remediesCPLR article 78municipal lawComptrollerpolice disabilitydisability retirement
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 20, 2012

Pooler v. Nassau University Medical Center

Plaintiff Keith Pooler, an inmate, sued Nassau Health Care Corporation (NHCC), Dr. Bruce David, and Joseph Farhangian for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pooler alleged he was denied anxiety and sleeping disorder medication, leading to a severe anxiety attack and suicide attempt. Defendants sought summary judgment, arguing failure to exhaust administrative remedies and lack of deliberate indifference. The Court granted summary judgment for the defendants, citing Pooler's failure to exhaust remedies and finding no deliberate indifference. Consequently, federal claims were dismissed with prejudice, and state law claims without prejudice.

Prisoner Medical CareDeliberate IndifferenceEighth AmendmentSuicide AttemptMental Health ServicesSummary JudgmentExhaustion of Administrative RemediesPrison Litigation Reform Act42 U.S.C. Section 1983Pro Se Litigation
References
56
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

DeRosa v. Dyster

The dissenting judge, Garni, J., argues against the majority's decision in a CPLR article 78 proceeding. The case involves a petitioner who retired from the City of Niagara Falls and was subsequently denied post-employment health insurance or opt-out payments, despite a memorandum of understanding with her union. Garni, J. contends that the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies available through the collective bargaining agreement's grievance procedure. The dissent asserts that the grievance procedure applied to retirees and disputes over retirement benefits, and that the petitioner was aggrieved prior to her retirement, thus being obligated to pursue a grievance. Therefore, Garni, J. concludes that the petition should have been dismissed entirely due to the failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Administrative RemediesExhaustion DoctrineCPLR Article 78Collective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProcedureRetiree BenefitsHealth InsuranceOpt-out PaymentsDissenting OpinionLabor Law
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cox v. Carey

The petitioner, a probationary cook, was terminated by the New York Department of Correctional Services despite a prior Human Rights Division ruling in her favor regarding sex discrimination in hiring. She initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge this termination, alleging it was arbitrary and capricious. However, respondents sought dismissal, arguing that the petitioner had not exhausted her administrative remedies, having also filed a second complaint with the State Human Rights Division concerning the termination. The court, presided over by Judge Aaron E. Klein, granted the respondents' motion, dismissing the petition. The judge ruled that the petitioner's allegations could be adequately reviewed through the ongoing Human Rights Division proceedings, emphasizing the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies.

Article 78Probationary EmployeeEmployment TerminationAdministrative RemediesExhaustion DoctrineCivil Service LawHuman Rights DivisionJudicial ReviewArbitrary and Capricious ActionPublic Employment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 323 v. International Union of Electronic, Electrical, Salaried, MacHine & Furniture Workers

Plaintiffs, Local 323 and its officers, initiated a lawsuit against the International Union of Electronic, Electrical, Salaried, Machine and Furniture Workers (IUE). They alleged that the IUE unlawfully denied Local 323's right to disaffiliate, claiming the IUE amended its constitution to obstruct disaffiliation and breached its own rules in denying their application. Plaintiffs sought judicial enforcement of disaffiliation, retention of assets, an injunction, and damages. The defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting various defenses, including the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust internal union remedies. The court ultimately granted the defendant's motion, concluding that Local 323 had not exhausted its available administrative remedies within the union, a prerequisite for pursuing the claims in federal court, given the internal nature of the dispute.

Union DisaffiliationLabor LawLMRALMRDAExhaustion of Administrative RemediesInternal Union DisputeMotion to DismissBreach of ContractFederal Court JurisdictionUnion Constitution
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 14, 1992

Pyramid Co. v. Hudacs

The petitioner, operating Carousel Center, received work permits for a construction project involving access to Interstate Route 81. The Department of Labor (DOL) notified the Department of Transportation (DOT) that the petitioner failed to submit a prevailing wage schedule, deeming the project 'public work' under Labor Law § 220. Despite paying prevailing wages, the petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action, obtaining an injunction and depositing wage differences into court. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies because DOL had not yet completed its investigation or held a hearing. The appellate court affirmed, emphasizing that judicial review requires the exhaustion of administrative remedies, which had not occurred in this case.

Administrative remediesExhaustion doctrineCPLR Article 78Declaratory judgmentPublic workPrevailing wageLabor LawJudicial reviewAgency determinationFactual record
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 1,860 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