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

In re the Arbitration between Rotating Components, Inc. & District 4, International Union of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO

Petitioner moved to confirm an arbitration award, while Respondent cross-moved to vacate it, alleging imperfect execution and lack of a mutual, final, and definite award. The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement from December 1959, and a supplementary agreement from January 1960, which stipulated the assignment of the main agreement to a local union within 18 months, with arbitration if the assignment failed. The arbitrator issued an interim award on September 21, 1961, instructing the union to assign the agreement within 30 days. Upon the union's failure, the arbitrator, on October 29, 1961, assigned the agreement to a new local union to be formed for the employees of Rotating Components, Inc. The court found the arbitrator's award to be within his express powers and rejected the objection regarding the finality and definiteness of the award. Consequently, the court granted the petitioner's motion to confirm the award and denied the respondent's cross-motion to vacate it.

Arbitration AwardCollective BargainingUnion AssignmentContract DisputeMotion to ConfirmMotion to VacateLabor DisputeJudicial ReviewInterim AwardFinality of Award
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Kyne & Molfetas

This case involves an appeal from an order confirming an arbitration award, which was subsequently reversed and remanded to Special Term. The court mandated a hearing to determine two critical aspects: first, whether the arbitration contract was formed between the petitioner labor union and the respondent as an individual or on behalf of a corporate entity; and second, whether the respondent received due notice of the arbitration. The decision emphasizes that the court, not the arbitrator, must decide on the existence of a valid contract and proper notice. Furthermore, even if these conditions are met, the matter must be remanded to the arbitrator to clarify the ambiguity of the award, which directed payments to unidentified individuals, rendering it imperfectly executed and not a final and definite award as required by the Civil Practice Act.

ArbitrationContract ExistenceNotice RequirementAmbiguity in AwardRemandSpecial TermLabor UnionRespondent IdentityCivil Practice ActProcedural Reversal
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Thompson & S.L.T. Ready-Mix, Division of Torrington Industries, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from a Supreme Court order confirming an arbitration award. The petitioner, an employee laid off during a winter slowdown, filed a grievance after workers with lower seniority were recalled. An arbitrator found the employer, the respondent, violated the collective bargaining agreement's seniority provisions and ordered the petitioner to be made whole. The Supreme Court confirmed this award. On appeal, the court affirmed the arbitrability of the dispute due to the respondent's waiver and upheld the arbitrator's authority. However, the appellate court found the damages portion of the award lacked specificity and required a rehearing before the arbitrator for a final determination of the amount. The court also denied the petitioner's claim for counsel fees.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementSeniority Rights DisputeWaiver of ArbitrabilityArbitrator's AuthorityDamages AssessmentRemittal for ClarificationConfirmation of AwardVacation of AwardCounsel Fees Denied
References
7
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 07194 [167 AD3d 142]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 25, 2018

American Intl. Specialty Lines Ins. Co. v. Allied Capital Corp.

This appeal concerns an arbitration dispute between American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company (AISLIC) and Allied Capital Corporation regarding insurance coverage for a $10.1 million settlement. An arbitration panel initially issued a Partial Final Award (PFA) on liability but later reconsidered and reversed its decision, leading to a corrected PFA and a final award. AISLIC petitioned to vacate these subsequent awards and confirm the original PFA. The Appellate Division, First Department, ruled that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority under the functus officio doctrine by reconsidering its prior final determination on liability. Consequently, the corrected PFA and the final award were vacated, and the original PFA was reinstated.

ArbitrationFunctus OfficioPartial Final AwardVacaturInsurance CoverageAppellate ReviewJurisdictionArbitrator AuthorityLiabilityDamages
References
32
Case No. 23
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 30, 2020

American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company v. Allied Capital Corporation

This case addresses whether an arbitration panel exceeded its authority by reconsidering a "Partial Final Award" in an insurance dispute. The underlying dispute involved Ciena Capital LLC and Allied Capital Corporation seeking coverage from American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company (AISLIC) after settling a federal qui tam action. Initially, the arbitration panel issued a partial award, which was later reconsidered and corrected to grant both indemnification and defense costs. AISLIC challenged this reconsideration, arguing the panel was functus officio. The New York Court of Appeals reversed an Appellate Division ruling, holding that the initial "Partial Final Award" was not truly final because the parties had not mutually agreed to its finality. Consequently, the arbitration panel was deemed to have acted within its authority by reconsidering its initial determination, and the petition to vacate the corrected award was denied.

ArbitrationFunctus OfficioPartial Final AwardReconsiderationArbitrator AuthorityInsurance CoverageIndemnificationDefense CostsQui Tam ActionNew York Court of Appeals
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between M. Cohen Clothing Co. & Pascale

This case involves a motion filed by the petitioner, a subcontractor, seeking to confirm an arbitration award and obtain a money judgment against the respondents, who are manufacturers of men’s and boys’ clothing. The dispute originated from disagreements over workmanship of manufactured goods and the respondents' refusal to pay the final sum due, leading the petitioner to initiate arbitration proceedings. While the petitioner contended the respondents were bound by a collective bargaining agreement, the respondents asserted they were not signatories to the agreement and appeared voluntarily before the arbitrator solely to explain their position. The court, citing established precedents, ruled that a party cannot be compelled to arbitrate unless they have expressly agreed to it in writing. Since no such written agreement was demonstrated, the motion to confirm the arbitration award was denied.

ArbitrationSubcontractor DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementVoluntary AppearanceWritten AgreementContract LawMotion DenialArbitration AwardConfirmation
References
2
Case No. ADJ8558358
Regular
Sep 22, 2025

JOSE MEJIA vs. JB CRITCHLEY, INC., AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify that the defendant's prior appeals regarding the applicant's stipulated average weekly wage and permanent disability rate were exhausted and that the award was final as of October 2, 2024. The Board affirmed the imposition of penalties under Labor Code section 5814 and attorney fees under section 5814.5 due to the defendant's unreasonable delay in paying the final award. The defendant's arguments regarding seasonal employment and extrinsic mistake were rejected as the stipulated wages and findings were final and not adequately supported for setting aside. The original Findings and Award were rescinded and substituted to reflect the finality of the prior decision and the confirmed penalties and fees.

Labor Code section 5904Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardsemi-truck drivercervical spinethoracic spinelumbar spinehearing losspsychehypertension
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 30, 1989

Lange v. Sartorius, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, New York County, which affirmed an arbitrators’ award in favor of the petitioner and denied the respondents’ cross-motion to vacate it. The dispute arose from the petitioner's termination of employment, which was submitted to arbitration as per their employment agreements. The arbitrators found that the respondents had not complied with the agreements and rendered a monetary award to the petitioner, considering his sudden departure. The appellate court upheld the lower court's decision, emphasizing that arbitration awards are given deference and are not subject to judicial review for merely erroneous factual findings unless completely irrational. Since the arbitrators' award was not irrational, the Supreme Court's order was affirmed.

Arbitration AwardConfirmation of AwardVacatur of AwardEmployment DisputeJudicial Review of ArbitrationDeference to ArbitratorsIrrational FindingsNew York LawFederal LawAppellate Affirmation
References
4
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 07068 [165 AD3d 551]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 23, 2018

Matter of Franco v. Dweck

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a judgment from the Supreme Court, New York County, which was entered upon a partial final arbitration award in petitioners' favor. The appeals from prior orders granting the petition to confirm and denying the respondents' motion to vacate were dismissed as subsumed. A subsequent judgment entered upon a final arbitration award of attorneys' fees to petitioners was also affirmed. The court found that respondents' compliance with the partial final arbitration award's mandatory injunction rendered their appeal moot. It also concluded that respondents waived objections to the arbitration scope and that their contentions regarding preconditions to arbitrability, adjudication of third-party rights, and arbitrator partiality were without merit. The court also upheld the arbitrator's decision not to dissolve corporate entities and found the attorney fee award reasonable.

Arbitration AwardMootnessWaiver of ObjectionsArbitrabilityCorporate AgreementsArbitrator PartialityFunctus OfficioAttorneys' FeesJudicial ReviewAppellate Division First Department
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 100, Transport Workers Union v. New York City Transit Authority

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, which had granted a petition to vacate an arbitration award. The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement between the parties concerning expedited arbitration of safety issues related to "One Person Train Operation" (OPTO). When the petitioner refused to agree to hearing dates without discovery, the respondent filed a grievance, leading to a ruling by an Impartial Arbitrator directing adherence to scheduled dates. The Supreme Court initially vacated this arbitration award, but the appellate court reversed, holding that courts lack jurisdiction to review interlocutory arbitration decisions and can only intervene after a final determination in the arbitration proceeding.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceExpedited ArbitrationOne Person Train OperationJurisdictionInterlocutory DecisionAppellate ReviewCPLRVacatur of Award
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 9,972 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