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

Huntington Hospital v. Huntington Hospital Nurses' Ass'n

Huntington Hospital initiated an action under the Federal Arbitration Act to partially vacate an arbitration award, while the Huntington Hospital Nurses’ Association cross-petitioned to confirm it. The dispute originated from the Hospital unilaterally granting two nurses, Betty Evans and Lynn Meyer, longevity pay credits exceeding the ten-year cap stipulated in their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The arbitrator found the Hospital violated the CBA's sections on pay and exclusive bargaining rights. The arbitrator mandated the Hospital roll back excess credits and recover overpayments. The District Court denied the Hospital's petition, dismissing arguments regarding public policy, manifest disregard for law, and lack of award finality, ultimately confirming the arbitration award.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementLabor LawFederal Arbitration ActWage DisputesLongevity PayUnion RightsPublic Policy ExceptionManifest Disregard of LawContract Interpretation
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Feldman v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

This case concerns an action by Robert Feldman, as assignee, to recover on a third-party judgment against the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation. The original personal injury action involved Alexander Z. Dubicki and Anne Dubicki as plaintiffs, and the Marescos and Dr. Joseph Dashefsky as defendants, with Hospitals Corporation as a third-party defendant. The jury apportioned liability, with Hospitals Corporation found 54% negligent but not directly liable to the Dubickis; its liability was conditional on the Marescos paying the Dubickis an amount exceeding their 10% share. To overcome this impasse, Feldman loaned funds to the Marescos, who then paid the Dubickis, thereby satisfying the judgment against them. The Marescos then assigned their right of contribution from Hospitals Corporation to Feldman. The court found this arrangement valid and proper, rejecting the defendant's claim of a collusive scheme to circumvent the condition precedent established in Klinger v Dudley. The court granted Feldman's cross-motion for summary judgment, entitling him to recover from the Hospitals Corporation.

Third-party judgmentContributionApportionment of damagesSummary judgmentCollusion defenseCondition precedentAssignment of judgmentBona fide loanPublic policyUnjust enrichment
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

League of Voluntary Hospitals & Homes v. Local 1199, Drug, Hospital & Health Care Workers Union

The court addresses an application for a preliminary injunction against Local 1199, a union planning a three-day strike. The League of Voluntary Hospitals and Homes of N. Y. sought the injunction following a previous temporary restraining order concerning a one-day strike. The union argued that each planned strike required a new legal proceeding, but the court deemed the strikes "episodic and organically connected." Citing concerns about blocked ingress/egress to hospitals and the union president's threats to "shut down" facilities, the judge found a preliminary injunction necessary under Labor Law § 807 to protect public health and safety. The injunction restrains the union from unlawfully interfering with hospital operations, blocking access, and picketing within certain distances of hospital entrances and emergency rooms.

Labor DisputePreliminary InjunctionStrike ActionUnion ActivityHospital AccessPicketing RegulationsCollective BargainingCivil Disobedience ThreatPublic Health and SafetyIngress Egress Interference
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 07, 1975

Buchanan v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

The case concerns an appeal challenging a hospital lien and the application of a contractual period of limitations in an insurance policy. The plaintiff, as executrix of Percy Buchanan, sought to challenge a lien filed by the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation and compel Associated Hospital Services (AHS) to cover remaining hospital costs. The lower court initially granted AHS summary judgment, finding the action time-barred. However, the appellate court modified this decision, denying AHS's cross-motion for summary judgment. It ruled that a question of fact existed regarding whether AHS could be estopped from asserting the limitations period, given its silence on claim rejections until after the period had expired.

Hospital LienContractual Limitations PeriodSummary Judgment MotionEquitable EstoppelHealth Insurance PolicyStatute of LimitationsAppellate Court DecisionInsurance Coverage DisputeExecutorshipGroup Health Insurance
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2006

Ochei v. Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital

Plaintiff Joan Ochei brought an action against Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital and New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, alleging discrimination based on race and national origin, a hostile work environment, and retaliation, leading to constructive discharge. Ochei, a Licensed Practical Nurse, claimed inadequate training, negative evaluations, and transfer were discriminatory. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Ochei failed to establish a prima facie case. The court granted summary judgment, dismissing the complaint, finding no evidence to support Ochei's claims of discrimination, a hostile work environment, or constructive discharge. Additionally, Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital was deemed not a suable entity.

DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationConstructive DischargeSummary JudgmentEmployment LawTitle VIINew York State Human Rights Law
References
47
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 1977

Milashouskas v. Mercy Hospital

Plaintiff Judith Milashouskas, a nurse, sustained injuries while working at Mercy Hospital and received medical treatment at the hospital's emergency room. She and her husband initiated a medical malpractice action, alleging damages from negligent treatment. Mercy Hospital asserted an affirmative defense under Workers’ Compensation Law § 29(6), arguing the action was barred. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, dismissed this defense, a decision affirmed on appeal. The appellate court found that Milashouskas sought treatment as a member of the public, and the hospital failed to provide evidence linking the medical treatment to her employment. The court emphasized that plaintiffs must still prove their injuries were proximately caused by the alleged negligence, not the underlying accident.

Medical MalpracticeWorkers' CompensationAffirmative DefenseNegligenceHospital LiabilityEmergency TreatmentCPLRAppellate ReviewEmployment InjuryCausation
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Slaybough v. Nathan Littauer Hospital

Plaintiff, a manual laborer, suffered a severe hand injury and sought emergency care at Nathan Littauer Hospital. Due to significant delays (over six hours) in receiving proper treatment and the wound not being cleaned, his condition deteriorated, leading to failed surgeries performed by Dr. Thomas S. Eagan and permanent injury to his left index finger. Plaintiff sued the hospital and Dr. Eagan for medical malpractice, later discontinuing the claim against Eagan. A jury found the hospital liable, awarding $250,000 for pain and suffering. The hospital appealed, arguing improper denial of summary judgment, insufficient proximate cause proof, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The appeals court affirmed the judgment against Nathan Littauer Hospital, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict of negligence and damages.

Medical MalpracticeHospital NegligenceSurgical ErrorDelayed TreatmentProximate CauseSummary JudgmentVerdict UpheldDamages AwardTendon InjuryHand Surgery
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kaplan v. Bayley Seton Hospital

Deborah Kaplan was injured after a fall at Bayley Seton Hospital where she was going to work for St. Vincent's Medical Center, which operated within the same building. Both hospitals, although under a common corporate parent (Sisters of Charity Health Care Corporation), maintained separate legal entities and finances. Bayley Seton Hospital, the defendant, moved for summary judgment arguing that the Workers' Compensation Law should shield it from liability. However, the Supreme Court, Richmond County, denied this motion and granted the plaintiff's cross-motion to strike the affirmative defense. This appellate decision affirmed the lower court's ruling, emphasizing that the separate legal identities of the hospitals meant Bayley Seton could not be shielded from tort liability.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation DefenseCorporate VeilIntercorporate LiabilitySeparate Legal EntitiesPremises LiabilityAppellate ReviewHospital LiabilityTort Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Langan v. St. Vincent's Hospital

John Langan sought wrongful death damages for his civil union partner, Neil Conrad Spicehandler, against St. Vincent's Hospital of New York after Conrad's death. The central issue was Langan's standing as a 'surviving spouse' under EPTL 5-4.1, which the defendant challenged due to the same-sex nature of their relationship. The Supreme Court initially denied the dismissal motion, but the appellate court reversed, affirming that New York's statutory definition of marriage, and thus 'surviving spouse,' applies exclusively to different-sex couples. Citing legal precedents like Baker v Nelson and Matter of Cooper, the court concluded that restricting marital rights to different-sex couples does not violate equal protection. The decision emphasized that any redefinition of marriage to include same-sex relationships falls within the purview of the Legislature, not the judiciary.

Wrongful deathSame-sex civil unionSurviving spouseEPTL 5-4.1Equal Protection ClauseConstitutional lawStatutory interpretationMarriage definitionJudicial precedentLegislative intent
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 07, 1996

Manocherian v. Lenox Hill Hospital

This case revolves around a dispute between landlords (plaintiffs) and Lenox Hill Hospital (defendant) concerning the hospital's subletting of 15 apartments to its nurse-employees, which became subject to the Rent Stabilization Law (RSL). After the Omnibus Housing Act (OHA) restricted corporate subletting, Chapter 940 was enacted to exempt not-for-profit hospitals. Plaintiffs challenged Chapter 940, which the Court of Appeals declared unconstitutional as an impermissible regulatory taking. On remand, the lower court controversially interpreted previous rulings to grant renewal lease rights to the subtenant nurses, despite their not appearing in the action. This appellate court reversed that aspect, clarifying that the unconstitutionality of Chapter 940, combined with existing RSL provisions, means subtenants are not entitled to renewal leases, thereby limiting the scope of the *Cale* doctrine. The court granted plaintiffs judgments of possession for all apartments and directed a special referee to assess fair market use and occupancy.

Rent Stabilization LawPrimary ResidenceSubtenancyCorporate TenancyConstitutional LawRegulatory TakingChapter 940Omnibus Housing ActLease Renewal RightsAppellate Review
References
25
Showing 1-10 of 24,869 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