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 Carey & Westinghouse Electric Corp.

The case involves cross-appeals from an order of Special Term concerning the arbitration of discharge grievances in Buffalo and furlough grievances in Sharon under a collective bargaining agreement. The Special Term had denied arbitration for the Buffalo discharge grievances, which the appellate court found to be a misconception of the court's role in arbitration. The appellate court emphasized that only the existence of an agreement to arbitrate and a dispute thereunder should be considered, leaving matters of law and fact to the arbitrators. The court also deemed the question of public policy overriding arbitration rules premature. Regarding the Sharon furlough claims, the Special Term's decision to compel arbitration was affirmed, with the appellate court rejecting claims of Federal preemption. The final order was modified to grant the petitioner's motion to compel arbitration for the Buffalo discharge grievances and affirmed in all other respects.

ArbitrationCollective BargainingLabor DisputeDischarge GrievancesFurlough GrievancesCross-AppealSpecial Term OrderPublic PolicyFederal PreemptionAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education & Moore

This case involves an appeal by an unnamed petitioner (employer) seeking to vacate an arbitration award in Otsego County. The dispute originated from a grievance filed by Anthony Moore, a custodial worker, concerning his transfer to a new assignment. Moore's grievance was denied at earlier steps, leading the Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) to move it to arbitration. The petitioner contended that the grievance was time-barred due to Moore's late filing and CSEA's late referral to arbitration. The arbitrator rejected these arguments, deeming the grievance arbitrable. The Supreme Court denied the petitioner's application to vacate this arbitration award, and this appellate court affirmed that decision, finding the arbitrator's determination to be rational and within their authority.

Arbitration AwardGrievance ProcedureCollective Bargaining AgreementTimeliness DisputeVacate Arbitration AwardCPLR 7511Public Sector EmploymentCustodial WorkerEmployee TransferJudicial Review of Arbitration
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carey v. General Electric Company

This case involves a motion by the International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers (Union) to compel General Electric Company (Company) to arbitrate twelve grievances. The District Court, presided over by Judge Palmieri, examined questions of governing law, procedural arbitrability, substantive arbitrability, and the effect of NLRB jurisdiction. The court applied federal labor law, resolving doubts in favor of arbitration, and found most grievances arbitrable. However, arbitration for National Docket No. 4557 was denied because the Union's claim was based on an unlawful contract provision that discouraged membership in other unions.

Labor ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProcedureProcedural ArbitrabilitySubstantive ArbitrabilityFederal Labor LawNLRB JurisdictionSeniority RightsWage DisputesJob Classification
References
39
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Brunswick Central School District & Brittonkill Teachers Ass'n

This case involves an appeal from an order that granted the petitioner's application to stay arbitration. The petitioner and respondent, parties to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA), were in dispute after the petitioner denied tenure to a probationary teacher and the respondent filed a grievance challenging evaluation procedures. The Supreme Court initially granted the stay, concluding that the grievance challenged the non-arbitrable tenure decision rather than the arbitrable evaluation procedures. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, stating that the question of whether the evaluation procedures were violated pertained to the merits of the grievance and not its arbitrability, emphasizing the limited role of courts in staying arbitration.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProcedureTenure DisputeEvaluation ProceduresArbitrabilityStay of ArbitrationAppellate ReviewLabor RelationsEducation Law
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Massena Central School District

This case involves an appeal from a Supreme Court order that vacated an arbitration award concerning a custodian, Eric Fetterly. Fetterly, an employee of the petitioner and a member of the respondent union, filed three grievances after an on-the-job injury, disputing his vacation credits, sick leave, and a disciplinary letter. The arbitrator found in Fetterly's favor on all three issues. The Supreme Court vacated the arbitration award, finding the arbitrator exceeded his authority. The appellate court modified the Supreme Court's order, reversing its decision to vacate the arbitrator's determinations on grievances two and three, while affirming the vacatur of the first grievance.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceVacation CreditsSick LeaveDisciplinary ActionArbitrator AuthorityJudicial ReviewWorkers' Compensation LeavePublic Policy
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Carborundum Co. & Swisher

Petitioner sought a stay of arbitration initiated by respondents (unions) regarding disputes over work assignments and methods, specifically the use of IBM machines, research and development engineers, independent contractors, and trucking companies. The court determined that the arbitration clause in the labor agreement limited grievances to disagreements about the proper application, administration, performance, or enforcement of the agreement's terms. Petitioner successfully argued that the controversies involved its exclusive and unqualified management rights, which were not expressly abridged by the agreement. Therefore, the court ruled that these disputes did not constitute arbitrable grievances, granting the stay of arbitration.

Stay of ArbitrationManagement RightsLabor AgreementArbitration ClauseGrievance DefinitionWork Assignment DisputesExclusive Management PrerogativesCollective Bargaining AgreementNon-Arbitrable Disputes
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Ward Leonard Electric Co. & Local 419, International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers

The petitioner moved to stay arbitration, arguing the respondent union's grievances were untimely and non-arbitrable as they involved the 'wage structure'. The court determined that the timeliness of the grievances was an issue for the arbitrator, not the court. Regarding arbitrability, the court found that the dispute over job content and evaluation, even if leading to wage increases, did not constitute a dispute over the fundamental 'wage structure' as excluded by the contract. The court concluded that the dispute fell within the arbitration agreement. Consequently, the petitioner's motion for a stay of arbitration was denied.

ArbitrationStay of ArbitrationTimelinessService of ProcessArbitrabilityContract InterpretationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProcedureWage StructureJob Evaluation
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re of the Arbitration between Town of Evans & International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Petitioner appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Erie County, which denied its petition to stay arbitration, granted respondent's counterclaim to compel arbitration, and denied both parties' requests for attorney's fees and sanctions. The petitioner had terminated an accountant, Elmar Kiefer, for alleged sexual abuse and misuse of resources. Respondent filed a grievance on Kiefer's behalf, leading to a demand for arbitration under their collective bargaining agreement. Petitioner sought to stay arbitration, arguing it was against public policy as an arbitrator might reinstate Kiefer. The court affirmed the lower court's decision, stating that the public policy argument was premature and that courts should not pre-emptively assume an arbitrator will exceed their powers or violate public policy. The court also denied attorney's fees and sanctions for both parties.

ArbitrationPublic PolicyCollective Bargaining AgreementSexual HarassmentMisconductAttorney's FeesSanctionsAppellate ReviewGrievanceEmployment Termination
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration Between Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. & Freeman

This case involves Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (CBS) seeking to stay arbitration initiated by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Local 1212 (the Union). The Union cross-moved to compel arbitration concerning video tape recording jurisdiction and alleged violations of their collective bargaining agreement dated May 1, 1958. CBS argued that the Union's demands did not involve specific grievances and were untimely. The court, presided over by William O. Hecht, Jr., J., ruled that the demand for arbitration, including questions of subcontracting within and potentially outside specified territorial limitations and alleged violations of Sections 1.04, 1.05, and 6.01, was arbitrable. The court emphasized the policy of encouraging arbitration and rejected CBS's arguments regarding the specificity of grievances, timeliness, and alleged illegality of certain arbitration items. The motion to stay arbitration was denied, and the cross-motion to compel arbitration was granted for both items.

ArbitrationCollective BargainingLabor LawSubcontractingContract DisputeJurisdictionUnion RightsEmployer ObligationsGrievance ProcedureNational Labor Relations Act
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Herman & New York City Transit Authority

The petitioners sought to vacate an arbitration award issued by Theodore Kheel, the impartial chairman of the transit industry. Their grievance concerned work pick rules which they claimed violated their seniority status and previous agreements between the Authority and its employees' unions. The arbitrator had denied their grievance, leading the petitioners to allege partiality and misbehavior on his part for consulting the Transport Workers Union. The court, however, found no basis for these charges, noting the informal nature of the arbitration and the arbitrator's prerogative to seek the union's opinion given the potential impact on other employees. Ultimately, the court concluded there was no impartiality or misbehavior and dismissed the petition to vacate the award.

arbitration awardvacate awardpartialitymisbehaviorwork rulesseniority rightsunion agreementgrievanceimpartial chairmanTransit Authority
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 2,099 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