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. ADJ2203540
Regular
Jan 11, 2012

GORDON ANTHONY vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the Applicant, Gordon Anthony. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to correct a clerical error in the original decision dated October 18, 2011. Specifically, the Board amended the decision to change the applicant's name from "ANTHONY GORDON" to "GORDON ANTHONY" in multiple locations of the findings and order. Otherwise, the Board affirmed the original decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationClerical ErrorFindings of FactOrderOpinion on DecisionApplicantDefendantSelf-InsuredAmended Decision
References
0
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 04681
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 12, 2019

Fidler v. Gordon-Herricks Corp.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, concerning a personal injury action filed by Robert Fidler against Gordon-Herricks Corp. and F. Pinheiro Contractor Corp. Fidler appealed the Supreme Court's grant of summary judgment to defendant F. Pinheiro Contractor Corp. The Supreme Court had previously granted summary judgment to other defendants, citing the "law of the case" doctrine for Pinheiro. The Appellate Division found the "law of the case" doctrine inapplicable to Pinheiro, as the prior dismissals were based on grounds specific to the other defendants. Nevertheless, the Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against Pinheiro, concluding that Pinheiro, as a third-party contractor, owed no duty to the plaintiff and did not "launch a force or instrument of harm."

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentAppellate DivisionLaw of the Case DoctrineThird-Party ContractorPremises LiabilityDuty (Tort Law)Workers' CompensationNassau CountyLoading Dock Ramp
References
11
Case No. No. 75 B 1735
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 1976

In Re WT Grant Co.

This case from the U.S. District Court, S.D. New York, addresses three appeals related to the bankruptcy estate of W. T. Grant Company. Paul S. Berger, Trustee, and other plaintiffs-appellants challenged a Bankruptcy Court order dismissing their amended complaint. They also appealed the denial of their motions for a nunc pro tunc extension to file a notice of appeal and for reconsideration of that denial. District Judge Irving Ben Cooper granted the defendant trustee Charles G. Rodman's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' initial appeal, ruling it was untimely filed 18 days after the Bankruptcy Court's order, exceeding the 10-day limit with a 30-day absolute maximum. The court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's subsequent denials of the extension and reconsideration motions, emphasizing the strict interpretation of Bankruptcy Rules 801, 802, and 803 to ensure the expeditious and final administration of bankrupt estates.

Bankruptcy AppealTimelinessNotice of AppealExcusable NeglectJurisdictional DefectBankruptcy Rules 801Bankruptcy Rules 802Bankruptcy Rules 803Finality of OrdersTrustee in Bankruptcy
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 11, 1992

Gordon v. MCI Telecommunications Corp.

Shari Shapiro Gordon, an Orthodox Jewish woman, filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against MCI Telecommunications Corp. under Title VII and New York Human Rights Law. Gordon alleged that MCI refused to hire her for a Staff Assistant position due to her need to leave work early on Fridays during the fall and winter for Sabbath observance. MCI moved for summary judgment, contending that Gordon failed to establish a prima facie case and that accommodating her religious practices would impose an undue hardship. The court denied MCI's motion, finding that Gordon had presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable trier of fact to conclude a prima facie case of discrimination. Furthermore, MCI's claims of undue hardship were deemed speculative, lacking concrete evidence regarding actual operational disruptions or financial burdens. The case will proceed to trial.

Religious DiscriminationEmployment LawTitle VIINew York Human Rights LawSabbath ObservanceUndue HardshipReasonable AccommodationSummary JudgmentPrima Facie CaseFederal District Court
References
17
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 05187
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 2015

Matter of Grant v. Town of Lewisboro

Lawrence Grant, a parks maintenance worker for the Town of Lewisboro, had his position abolished when the Town adopted its 2012 budget, eliminating funding. Grant initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, claiming the termination violated Civil Service Law § 75 and sought reinstatement with back pay. The Town presented evidence that the position was abolished in good faith due to budget reductions to promote efficiency and economy. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, denied Grant's petition, finding he failed to prove the Town acted in bad faith. The Appellate Division affirmed this judgment, concluding that the Town properly abolished the position through budget enactment and Grant did not raise a triable issue of fact regarding bad faith.

Abolition of PositionCivil Service LawCPLR Article 78Bad FaithMunicipal BudgetPublic EmploymentParks Maintenance WorkerWestchester CountyAppellate Division
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Felton v. Ullman

Plaintiffs Danny Felton and Melvin Waddy filed an action under the Labor Management Relations Act, seeking a declaratory judgment that Felton is the rightful President of New York Letter Carriers Branch 36 and an injunction against defendant Arthur Ullman. The dispute arose after the resignation of Branch 36's President, Joseph S. Giordano. Felton, as Vice President, argued he should succeed based on the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) Constitution, which he contended conflicted with Branch 36's by-laws that placed the Executive Vice President (Ullman) first in the line of succession. NALC President Vincent J. Sombrotto ruled that the Branch 36 by-law was valid and not in conflict with the NALC Constitution, citing established practice and prior rulings. The court, deferring to the union official's reasonable interpretation of the union's constitution, found Sombrotto's ruling to be neither unreasonable nor unfair. Felton's unsubstantiated claims of discrimination were dismissed. Consequently, the court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs' motion.

Labor Management Relations ActUnion By-LawsNALC ConstitutionSuccession of OfficersSummary JudgmentJudicial DeferenceUnion Internal AffairsExecutive Vice PresidentVice PresidentDeclaratory Judgment
References
12
Case No. ADJ865164 (AHM0127447)
Regular
Jun 13, 2011

DARRIEN GORDON vs. OAKLAND RAIDERS, PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, XCHANGING, INC., ATLANTA FALCONS, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and vacated its prior decision because the insurer for the Atlanta Falcons' petition for reconsideration of the original arbitrator's award was untimely filed. The Board found that the petition was received and electronically filed after the statutory deadline. Therefore, the Board rescinded its March 22, 2011 decision and dismissed the Falcons' untimely petition. This ruling effectively reinstates the original arbitrator's award concerning employer liability for applicant Darrien Gordon's workers' compensation claim.

Darrien GordonOakland RaidersPacific Employers Insurance CompanyXchanging Inc.Atlanta FalconsSt. Paul TravelersDarrien GordonDarrien GordonDarrien GordonDarrien Gordon
References
5
Case No. ADJ10070672 ADJ10070673 ADJ10070674
Regular
Sep 12, 2018

JOAO GOMEZ vs. JP ELECTRIC SERVICES, INC, NEW YORK MARINE \& GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and rescinded a finding of contempt and award of fees against applicant's law firm, Gordon & Gordon. The WCAB found the original order procedurally defective, lacking proper notice and findings for contempt and sufficient documentation for the fee award. While rescinding the sanctions, the WCAB strongly admonished Gordon & Gordon for its repeated failures to appear, stating that proper procedures could have led to valid sanctions. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationContempt of CourtFee AwardProcedural DefectSubstantive DefectFailure to AppearShow Cause HearingLabor Code Section 5813SanctionsDue Process
References
8
Case No. ADJ782721 (SBR 0340531)
Regular
Feb 14, 2011

ROSALIND GRANT vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of an order dismissing Rosalind Grant's claim due to her failure to appear at trial. The WCAB found the dismissal improper because Grant's attorney was present at trial, and the rules permit dismissal only if a party and their representative fail to appear. Furthermore, the applicant has no obligation to testify, and defendants must formally subpoena an absent applicant or provide a notice to appear to their attorney. The case was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including potential action on a previously negotiated compromise and release.

ReconsiderationDismissal OrderFailure to AppearCompromise and ReleaseAttorney RepresentationMandatory Settlement ConferenceNotice of Intention to DismissRescinded OrderReturn to Trial LevelHearsay Evidence
References
3
Case No. CA 12-01577
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2013

MEABON, GRANT v. TOWN OF POLAND

Plaintiff Grant Meabon filed a Labor Law and common-law negligence action after sustaining injuries while working on a pole barn for the Town of Poland, an employee of Sherwood A. Chapman d/b/a Cadillac Carpentry. The Town of Poland sought contractual indemnification from Cadillac Carpentry. Initially, the Supreme Court granted partial summary judgment to the Town. However, the Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that the indemnification contract was executed after the accident and lacked retroactive intent. Consequently, the court denied the Town's motion and granted Cadillac's cross-motion for summary judgment, dismissing the third-party complaint.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentRetroactive ContractWorkers' Compensation LawLabor LawCommon Law NegligenceThird Party ActionAppealAppellate DivisionEmployer Liability
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 17,201 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