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
Nov 06, 2000

Gonzalez v. New York State Department of Correctional Services Fishkill Correctional Facility

Plaintiff Mildred Gonzalez, a Hispanic female corrections officer, sued the New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS), Fishkill Correctional Facility (Fishkill), and several individual defendants, alleging discrimination based on gender, race, color, and national origin, and retaliation under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Gonzalez claimed her co-worker, Herbert Reilly, created a hostile work environment which her supervisors failed to address. The court dismissed the complaint as to Defendant Clark for lack of service, Title VII claims against individual defendants, and state law claims against DOCS and Fishkill. However, the court allowed hostile work environment and retaliation claims against DOCS and Fishkill to proceed and granted leave to amend the complaint to include a negligent supervision claim against Mann and Ercole.

Hostile Work EnvironmentTitle VII Discrimination42 U.S.C. § 1983Gender DiscriminationRace DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationRetaliationEmployment DiscriminationMotion to DismissMotion to Amend Complaint
References
53
Case No. 08-cv-6567L
Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. NYS Department of Corrections Attica Correctional Facility

Plaintiff Stefanie A. Davis, a former employee of the New York State Department of Corrections at Attica Correctional Facility, filed a lawsuit alleging race and gender discrimination and unlawful retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law. She claimed her supervisor assigned her a disproportionate number of minority inmates, and she faced retaliation after complaining. Defendant's initial motion for summary judgment was granted for all claims except retaliation. Following this, Defendant filed a second motion for summary judgment on the remaining retaliation claim. The court granted Defendant's second summary judgment motion, concluding that Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for retaliation, specifically noting the absence of protected activity and materially adverse employment action.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationTitle VIINew York State Human Rights LawSummary JudgmentRace DiscriminationGender DiscriminationProtected ActivityAdverse Employment ActionPro Se Litigant
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Reed v. Great Meadow Correctional Facility

The decision addresses a habeas corpus petition filed by Robert Reed against Great Meadow Correctional Facility. Reed had been convicted of two counts of first-degree rape in Niagara County, a conviction which was largely affirmed on appeal, though his sentences were modified to run concurrently. He raised four primary grounds for federal habeas relief: insufficiency of evidence, incredibility of witnesses, prosecutorial misconduct, and improper consolidation of indictments during his trial. The court, however, rejected each of Reed's arguments, finding that the evidence presented at trial was constitutionally sufficient, witness credibility was properly within the jury's discretion, no prosecutorial misconduct as defined by precedent occurred, and the joinder of indictments was appropriate. Citing relevant case law, the court determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate actual prejudice from the joinder and that the jury was properly instructed. As a result, the petition for habeas corpus was dismissed, and a certificate of appealability was denied, as the court found no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

Habeas CorpusRape ConvictionInsufficiency of EvidenceWitness CredibilityProsecutorial MisconductJoinder of IndictmentsDue ProcessActual Prejudice StandardFederal Habeas ReliefState Court Conviction
References
18
Case No. 525127
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2018

Matter of Maloney v. Wende Corr. Facility

Claimant Shawn Maloney, a correction officer, injured his right shoulder while working at Wende Correctional Facility. His workers' compensation claim was established. Conflicting medical reports from his treating orthopedist, Michael Grant (90% SLU), and an independent medical examiner, Gregory Shankman (50% SLU), led to a hearing. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) credited Shankman's opinion, finding a 50% schedule loss of use (SLU) of the right arm. The Workers' Compensation Board upheld this decision. On appeal, the claimant argued the employer waived defenses by not filing a prehearing conference statement, but the court disagreed, noting the claim was not controverted. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported crediting Shankman's medical opinion due to the Board's precedent against duplicative assignments of loss of use values for anterior flexion and abduction deficits.

Schedule Loss of Use (SLU)Right Arm InjuryShoulder InjuryOrthopedic EvaluationMedical Expert TestimonyConflicting Medical EvidenceAppellate Division Third DepartmentPrehearing Conference Statement RuleWaiver of DefensesMedical Impairment Guidelines
References
8
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 09078 [178 AD3d 1268]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 2019

Matter of Donovan v. DOCCS Coxsackie Corr. Facility

Danl D. Donovan, a correction sergeant, sustained a work-related hip injury. His employer, DOCCS Coxsackie Correctional Facility, advanced his wages and sought reimbursement. Following an award for a schedule loss of use, a dispute arose regarding the deduction of attorney fees from the claimant's payment, which the Workers' Compensation Board upheld. While Donovan's appeal was pending before the Appellate Division, the Board issued an amended decision based on a new legal rationale. Consequently, the Appellate Division, Third Department, dismissed the initial appeal as moot.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseAttorney Fee DeductionReimbursement DisputeMoot AppealAppellate DivisionWork-related InjuryWage ReimbursementIndependent Medical ExaminerAdministrative Review
References
2
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02248 [237 AD3d 1379]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2025

Matter of Jehle v. DOCCS Coxsackie Corr. Facility

William Jehle, a correction officer, sustained a work-related injury, prompting his employer, DOCCS Coxsackie Correctional Facility, to continue paying his full wages. The employer sought reimbursement, and Jehle's attorney filed for counsel fees. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim, found a temporary total disability, awarded a credit to the employer for wage reimbursement, and granted counsel fees of $4,300 as a lien against this reimbursement. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision, deeming the lien proper under Workers' Compensation Law § 24 (2) (b). The Appellate Division, Third Department, further affirmed the Board's decision, holding that an award for previously unawarded benefits constitutes an 'increase' under the law, and that counsel fees are appropriately a lien against the employer's reimbursement, dismissing arguments of the employer subsidizing fees.

Counsel FeesLien on AwardEmployer ReimbursementTemporary Total DisabilityWorkers' Compensation LawAppellate ReviewCorrection OfficerWage ReimbursementStatutory InterpretationClaimant Attorney Fees
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. State of New York Department of Corrections

Plaintiff Melvin Davis, an African-American correction officer at Fishkill Correctional Facility, sued his employer DOCCS and coworkers Keith Canfield and James McAnney for hostile work environment under Title VII and § 1983, and for retaliation under Title VII. Davis alleged three incidents: a bag remnant and twine resembling a noose, a toy rat with a noose outside his apartment, and racist graffiti in the workplace restroom. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding that the bag remnant did not objectively resemble a noose, the toy rat incident could not be attributed to the defendants, and DOCCS took appropriate remedial action regarding the graffiti. Consequently, the court concluded that the incidents were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile work environment, and the retaliation claim also failed due to lack of attributable adverse action.

DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary JudgmentCorrection OfficerWorkplace HarassmentRacial DiscriminationCivil RightsTitle VIISection 1983
References
52
Case No. 02-CV-6666L
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 29, 2008

Brown v. NEW YORK STATE DEPT. OF CORREC. SERVICES

Plaintiff, Curtis Brown, a Correction Officer, sued his employer, the New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS), and several individuals for racial discrimination and retaliation under Title VII, Sections 1981, 1983, and the New York Human Rights Law. Brown alleged a hostile work environment due to continuous harassment, verbal abuse, and physical violence by white coworkers at Elmira Correctional Facility since 2001, along with retaliatory discipline. Defendants sought summary judgment. The court dismissed claims against individual defendants under Title VII, all claims against Elmira, the State Comptroller, Civil Service, and all constructive discharge claims due to Eleventh Amendment immunity or other legal deficiencies. However, the court denied summary judgment on Brown's Title VII hostile work environment and retaliation claims against DOCS, finding sufficient evidence of fact disputes for these claims to proceed to trial.

Racial DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationEmployment LawTitle VIICivil Rights ActSection 1981Section 1983Human Rights LawSummary Judgment Motion
References
83
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Arbitration between New York State Department of Correctional Services & New York State Correctional Officers

This case involves an appeal from a Supreme Court order vacating an arbitration award. Petitioners, the Department of Correctional Services and Governor's Office of Employee Relations, challenged an arbitrator's decision to grant a correction sergeant, Charles Hannigan, approximately $4,000 in vacation and holiday accruals. The arbitrator had initially issued an award with a 45-day suspension for Hannigan and then retained jurisdiction to ensure "made whole" implementation. Petitioners argued the arbitrator exceeded his power by reopening the arbitration. The Supreme Court agreed and vacated the award, a decision affirmed by the appellate court. The appellate court found that the arbitrator's retention of jurisdiction and subsequent reopening of the award violated explicit limitations in the collective bargaining agreement.

Arbitration awardVacaturArbitrator's jurisdictionCollective bargaining agreementPublic employmentCorrection officerBack payEmployee benefitsWaiverScope of arbitration
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Duffy v. Taconic Correctional Facility

A correction officer, transferred from Jefferson County to Dutchess County, secured housing 30 miles from his new workplace at an employer-maintained facility. On February 3, 2005, he slipped and fell in the parking lot of this housing facility while on his way to work, injuring his back. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Board initially determined that the injury arose out of and in the course of his employment, entitling him to benefits. The employer and carrier appealed this decision. The appellate court reversed, ruling that the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment, as there was no sufficient nexus between the accident site and the employer's premises, and the claimant was not required to live on-site but did so for convenience. The court also noted that the claimant's assignment was permanent, not temporary business travel, and he did not qualify as an outside employee. The matter was remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationCourse of EmploymentTraveling to WorkEmployer PremisesHousing AccommodationCorrection OfficerSlip and FallAccidental InjuryPermanent TransferJudicial Review
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 2,997 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