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. 2023 NY Slip Op 00103 [212 AD3d 644]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 11, 2023

Pecora v. Fitness Intl., LLC

Michael Pecora appealed from an order granting summary judgment to Fitness International, LLC, in a personal injury action. Pecora alleged he contracted infections, including MRSA, from using a sauna at the defendant's health club. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the lower court's decision. The court found that the defendants demonstrated the plaintiff could not prove the pathogen originated at their facility, noting MRSA's common transmission, regular cleaning, and lack of prior complaints. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact, leading to the affirmation of the dismissal.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityMRSAHealth ClubProximate CauseSpeculationDangerous ConditionInfectious DiseaseAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brennan v. Bally Total Fitness

Kathryn Brennan filed a civil rights action against her former employer, Bally Total Fitness Corp., alleging sexual harassment under Title VII and disability discrimination under the ADA. Bally moved to dismiss the complaint as untimely and to compel arbitration based on its Employee Dispute Resolution Procedure (EDRP). The court denied Bally's motion to dismiss the Title VII claim, applying the 'continuing-violation exception' due to Brennan's allegations of ongoing harassment. The court also denied Bally's motion to compel arbitration, finding Bally's unilateral modifications to the EDRP invalid and raising questions of unconscionability regarding the original EDRP. The case is remanded for jurisdictional discovery and a possible hearing to determine the validity of the arbitration agreement.

Civil RightsSexual HarassmentDisability DiscriminationTitle VIIAmericans with Disabilities Act (ADA)Arbitration AgreementFederal Arbitration Act (FAA)Motion to DismissMotion to Compel ArbitrationContinuing Violation Exception
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Nieddu v. Lifetime Fitness, Inc.

This case involves a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action brought by former hair stylist Pier Nieddu against Lifetime Fitness. Nieddu sought conditional certification for a class of commission-paid hair stylists at Lifetime Fitness's Houston CityCentre location, alleging failures to pay minimum wage and overtime due to a policy of not tracking all hours worked, resulting in "off-the-clock" labor. The court, applying an intermediate standard of review, denied the motion for conditional certification. The decision concluded that Nieddu failed to demonstrate that the putative class members were "similarly situated" or victims of a common illegal policy, citing Lifetime Fitness's clear timekeeping regulations and the highly individualized nature of the plaintiff's and opt-in plaintiff's complaints. As a result, opt-in class member Rosalind Hampton was dismissed without prejudice.

FLSAFair Labor Standards ActCollective ActionConditional CertificationOff-the-Clock WorkUnpaid Minimum WageUnpaid Overtime CompensationCommission-Paid EmployeesHair StylistsEmployment Law
References
55
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Perez v. Tru-Fit Manufacturing Co.

Plaintiff, an employee of TFM Industries, was injured in a parking lot in New Jersey and received workers' compensation benefits under New Jersey law. She subsequently filed a common-law tort action against Tru-Fit Manufacturing Co., Inc., a corporation that had merged into TFM in 1981, alleging negligent work in the parking lot. The IAS court initially denied TFM's motion to dismiss, which was based on the exclusivity of workers' compensation as a remedy. The appellate court reversed this decision, granting the motion to dismiss the complaint against Tru-Fit Manufacturing Co., Inc. The court reasoned that New Jersey law should apply, which establishes workers' compensation as the exclusive remedy, and rejected the application of the 'Billy' exception, as the alleged liability was not deemed separate from TFM's role as an employer and operator of the business premises.

Workers' CompensationExclusive RemedyNew Jersey LawCommon-Law TortCorporate LiabilityPremises LiabilityMotion to DismissSummary JudgmentAppellate ReversalEmployer Immunity
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

D'Agostino v. LA Fitness International, LLC

Maria D’Agostino (Plaintiff) sued LA Fitness and several related entities and an individual (Defendants) for age and gender discrimination, and retaliation, under the New York State Human Rights Law, Title VII, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Plaintiff, a Training General Manager, alleged discriminatory remarks by her supervisor Michael Sharp and preferential treatment for younger male counterparts. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Plaintiff was demoted due to poor sales performance and staffing issues, not discrimination. The court granted Defendants' motion, finding Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for her demotion were pretextual, and also failed to establish a prima facie case for retaliation or a hostile work environment.

Age DiscriminationGender DiscriminationRetaliationSummary JudgmentHostile Work EnvironmentMcDonnell Douglas FrameworkPrima Facie CasePretextSales PerformanceEmployee Demotion
References
50
Case No. ADJ9787852
Regular
Oct 18, 2016

CAROLINE NJOKI vs. 24 HOUR FITNESS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case affirms an award of temporary total disability benefits to an applicant injured while working for 24 Hour Fitness. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found that the employer failed to provide modified work within the applicant's medical restrictions. The employer's assertion that they offered modified work was contradicted by the applicant's credible testimony, which the Board credited. Therefore, the applicant's wage loss was deemed total, entitling her to ongoing temporary total disability benefits.

Temporary total disabilityModified workMedical restrictionsDriving restrictionCommuteGood faith offerWCJ credibilityHearsay evidenceLabor CodeRebuttal evidence
References
4
Case No. ADJ7582253
Regular
Dec 13, 2011

CHRISTOPHER GONZALEZ vs. 24 HOUR FITNESS, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order finding Christopher Gonzalez's claim against 24 Hour Fitness timely. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which concluded that voluntarily provided medical treatment by the employer extended the statute of limitations to five years. Furthermore, the WCJ found the employer's denial notice failed to comply with notice requirements and contained ambiguous language, and that the applicant met the elements of equitable estoppel, preventing the employer from asserting the statute of limitations defense.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatute of LimitationsTollingStandard RectifierVoluntary Medical TreatmentLabor Code Section 5402(c)Equitable EstoppelNotice Requirements
References
5
Case No. ADJ7649889
Regular
Aug 13, 2012

ANDREA FREDENBURG vs. 24-HR FITNESS, ACE AMERICAN, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

This case concerns a petition for removal filed by the defendant, 24-HR Fitness, seeking to vacate a prior ruling that allowed limited discovery. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition, adopting the judge's report. The judge found that the defendant's claims of prejudice and irreparable harm were unsubstantiated. Therefore, discovery remains open solely for the applicant to depose Dr. Hamilton on the issue of earnings, with admissibility to be determined at trial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationRemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceAdmissibilityDepositionDr. HamiltonEarningsPrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McPartland v. United Ass'n of Journeymen

Plaintiffs, former union members including Eugene McPartland, sued the national United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry and its locals, 313 and 638B, alleging LMRDA violations regarding membership transfer. They claimed Local 313 refused their travel cards for transfer to Michigan, despite prior assurances. The court addressed the defendants' motions to dismiss for improper venue and failure to state a claim. Motions to dismiss for improper venue were granted for the national Union and Local 313, as no alleged violations occurred in the Eastern District of New York. Local 638B's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was also granted, as plaintiffs received the travel cards they requested and did not demonstrate a refusal of transfer cards or any obstruction by Local 638B.

LMRDA ViolationUnion Membership TransferImproper VenueFailure to State a ClaimLabor LawLocal Union DisputeTravel CardsTransfer CardsAgency RelationshipMotions to Dismiss
References
20
Case No. 03-21-00120-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2022

Brian Manley, Chief of Austin Police Department Brian Manley, Individually Commander Mark Spangler, Austin Police Department Lt. Jerry Bauzon, Austin Police Department Officer Benjamin Bloodworth, Austin Police Department Officer Collin Fallon, Austin Police Department Sgt. Eric Kilcollins, Training Coordinator, Austin Police Academy And Officer Shand, Lead Instructor, Stress Reaction Training, Austin Police Academy v. Christopher Wise

Christopher Wise, a former Austin Police Academy cadet, sued Brian Manley (APD Chief) and six other APD officers after sustaining severe injuries, including heat exhaustion and stroke, during a stress reaction training in October 2018. Wise alleged that officers intentionally discouraged cadets from hydrating despite high temperatures and failed to provide timely medical aid. The defendants sought dismissal under the Texas Tort Claims Act's election-of-remedies provisions. The district court dismissed claims against the City of Austin and APD but not against the individual officers. The appellate court reversed the district court's decision, ruling that Wise's claims against the individual officers were based on conduct within the scope of their employment and could have been brought under the TTCA, thus mandating their dismissal.

Texas Tort Claims ActGovernmental ImmunityElection of RemediesScope of EmploymentPolice MisconductCadet InjuryHeat IllnessSupervisor NegligenceAppellate CourtReversal
References
25
Showing 1-10 of 169 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