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

Chavis v. New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying

The petitioners, led by Dr. Benjamin Chavis on behalf of the Coalition for Fairness, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding against the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying and its Executive Director, David Grandeau. They sought to compel the Commission to adopt rules for adjudicatory proceedings compliant with the State Administrative Procedure Act (SAPA) and to nullify a prior determination regarding a failure to file a semiannual report. The court ruled that the Commission was not an "agency" under SAPA due to a lack of rulemaking authority and the power to make final adjudicatory decisions. However, the court converted the proceeding to a declaratory judgment action and declared sections 1-n (b) and (c) of the Lobbying Act unconstitutional for violating federal and state Due Process Clauses by failing to provide notice and a hearing prior to determining a knowing and willful violation. The Commission's subsequently issued guidelines were deemed insufficient to rectify this statutory defect.

Due ProcessConstitutional LawAdministrative LawCPLR Article 78Lobbying ActState Administrative Procedure ActAgency DefinitionUnincorporated AssociationCivil PenaltiesNotice and Hearing
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 17, 1987

In re Carmelo R.

This case addresses the foster care status of Carmelo R., a youngster who entered foster care in 1984, and the Commissioner of Social Services' failure to timely file a required review petition. The Commissioner initiated the proceeding over a year late and subsequently moved to withdraw it, arguing the court lost jurisdiction because Carmelo had turned 18 years old during its pendency. The court rejected this jurisdictional argument, holding that jurisdiction continues when a foster care proceeding is initiated while the child is under 18, to avoid absurd outcomes and ensure entitled care. The court emphasized that statutory interpretation must not lead to absurd results or reward noncompliance, especially when it concerns vulnerable children. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion to withdraw was denied, and the case was calendared for further proceedings.

Foster CareJurisdictionStatutory InterpretationSocial Services LawFamily Court ActAge of MajorityChild WelfareLate FilingJudicial ReviewDue Process
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lubrano v. New York State Workers' Compensation Board

This case concerns a proceeding initiated by petitioners under CPLR article 78 to prevent the New York State Workers’ Compensation Board from issuing money judgments. The petitioners sought to enjoin the board until they were granted a full fact-finding hearing, challenging the board's determination that they failed to make compensation payments. The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, initially ruled in favor of the petitioners, vacating existing judgments and directing the board to provide a hearing. However, the Workers' Compensation Board appealed this decision. The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's judgment and dismissed the proceeding. The appellate court held that the Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, has exclusive jurisdiction over matters reviewable by it, thereby precluding recourse to a CPLR article 78 proceeding. Any claims of procedural due process failures in administrative decisions, according to the court, are exclusively for the appellate court to resolve.

CPLR Article 78Workers' Compensation BoardJurisdictionAppellate ReviewProcedural Due ProcessInjunctionMoney JudgmentsAdministrative DecisionSuffolk County Supreme CourtThird Judicial Department
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Theresa J. v. Patricia J.

This case involves an appeal in a neglect proceeding under Article 10 of the Family Court Act, where the respondent mother was accused of neglecting her three children due to drug misuse. Evidence presented included the mother testing positive for cocaine during childbirth, her admission to occasional cocaine use, and the premature birth and death of one child due to renal failure. While the majority found a prima facie case of neglect warranting a continued fact-finding hearing, the dissenting justice argued that a prima facie case was not established, citing a lack of proof for repeated drug misuse or a direct causal link between the mother's drug use and the child's impairment or death. Both the majority and dissent agreed to remand the case for further proceedings, especially considering a potential subsequent drug arrest of the respondent.

NeglectChild ProtectionDrug MisuseCocainePremature BirthInfant DeathPrima Facie CaseRemandFamily Court ActAppeal
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Davidson v. LaGrange Fire District

A firefighter (petitioner) injured in the line of duty received salary benefits but was denied medical benefits for therapy and knee surgery by her employer and its insurer. The petitioner sought coverage under General Municipal Law § 207-a directly from the LaGrange Fire District and Board of Fire Commissioners. Despite being advised to pursue the matter with the Workers’ Compensation Board, the petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to compel her employers to make a final determination on her medical benefit request. The Supreme Court initially denied the petition, citing a failure to exhaust administrative remedies with the WCB. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, clarifying that a municipal employer's obligations under General Municipal Law § 207-a are distinct from workers' compensation remedies and do not require prior exhaustion of WCB proceedings.

Firefighter injuryMedical benefitsGeneral Municipal Law § 207-aCPLR Article 78MandamusExhaustion of administrative remediesWorkers' Compensation BoardMunicipal employer liabilityKnee surgeryPhysical therapy
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 1978

In re Shantal M. K.

The Appellate Division reversed a Family Court order dismissing a permanent neglect petition brought by Graham-Windham Child Care Agency against the natural mother of a child named Shantal. The proceeding, initiated under Social Services Law § 384-b, sought to terminate parental rights due to the mother's failure to maintain contact or plan for the child's future. While the Family Court found a lack of diligent efforts by the agency, the appellate court determined that the agency was justified in discouraging further parental visitation given the child's history of abuse and the mother's inconsistent engagement. The court found that continued contact would be detrimental to Shantal's well-being. Consequently, the appellate court granted the petition and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Permanent neglectchild abuseparental rightsfoster carediligent effortsSocial Services Lawfamily lawappellate reviewchild welfarevisitation
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 29, 1985

Garden State Brickface & Stucco Co. v. Roberts

The petitioner appealed a judgment that dismissed their CPLR Article 78 proceeding. The proceeding sought to review determinations by the New York State Commissioner of Labor concerning prevailing wage violations and a five-year debarment from public works contracts. The appellate court modified the Supreme Court's judgment, annulling the debarment because the underlying wage violation determinations were made simultaneously, not sequentially, which fails to meet the 'knowing repetition' requirement for debarment under Labor Law § 220-b (3) (b). The court affirmed the judgment as modified and declined to consider the petitioner's arguments regarding penalties and interest due to their failure to appear at hearings and raise the issues earlier.

Public Works ContractsPrevailing WagesLabor Law ViolationsDebarmentCPLR Article 78Judicial ReviewAppellate DecisionSimultaneous DeterminationsKnowing RepetitionAdministrative Law
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 08, 2001

CSEA Local 1000 v. County of Dutchess

The case involves an Article 78 proceeding challenging the County of Dutchess's reclassification of Social Welfare Worker II job duties and seeking an injunction against out-of-title work. The Supreme Court, Dutchess County, granted the petition, and this judgment was affirmed on appeal. The court found that the reclassification was not final and binding due to the County's failure to notify affected employees, thus precluding a statute of limitations defense. Additionally, it was determined that the petitioner union had exhausted its contractual remedies, making the proceeding ripe for judicial review.

CPLR Article 78Job ReclassificationOut-of-title WorkStatute of LimitationsExhaustion of RemediesPublic Sector UnionAppellate ReviewDutchess CountyMunicipal LawAdministrative Law
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Misuraca v. Perales

This case involves appeals by the State and local Commissioners from two Supreme Court orders in a CPLR article 78 proceeding. The initial proceeding challenged a denial of a shelter allowance to an unnamed petitioner and was settled by stipulation. The Supreme Court had awarded attorney's fees to the petitioner as a 'prevailing party' under 42 USC § 1983. The appeals court dismissed the appeal concerning the denial of reargument, noting no appeal lies from such an order. Crucially, the court reversed the order awarding attorney's fees, ruling that the petitioner's federal due process claim, concerning the failure to produce a witness, was 'wholly without merit.' The court found the dispute involved a legal conclusion from undisputed facts, not a factual issue requiring cross-examination under Goldberg v Kelly, thus not entitling the petitioner to attorney's fees under 42 USC § 1988.

Attorney's FeesCPLR Article 78Due ProcessShelter AllowancePrevailing PartyFederal Constitutional ClaimState ClaimsStipulation of Settlement42 USC § 198342 USC § 1988
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 1991

Bonilla v. New York City Civil Service Commission

In a CPLR article 78 proceeding, the petitioner challenged a determination disqualifying him from a civil service eligible list for a sanitation worker position due to a psychiatric disorder. The Supreme Court, New York County, granted the respondents' cross motion to dismiss the petition, citing the petitioner's failure to commence the proceeding before the eligible list expired. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, relying on established case law such as Matter of Deas v Levitt, which mandates dismissal if a challenge to an eligible list determination is not initiated prior to the list's expiration. This ruling emphasizes the procedural requirement for timely legal action concerning civil service eligible lists.

Civil Service LawEligible ListDisqualificationPsychiatric DisorderNervous BreakdownTimeliness of PetitionExpiration of Eligible ListProcedural DismissalJudicial ReviewAppellate Affirmation
References
12
Showing 1-10 of 12,922 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