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

Bernard v. Local 100, Transport Workers Union

The plaintiffs, Carlyle Bernard and John Simino, members of Local 100, Transport Workers Union of America, sought a preliminary injunction to prevent their union from barring Bernard's candidacy for Recording Secretary. Bernard was disqualified due to a union bylaw requiring minimum meeting attendance, which he could not meet due to his work schedule. The plaintiffs argued that this rule was an unreasonable restriction on candidate eligibility under Title I of the LMRDA, thereby denying members equal rights to nominate and vote. The Court denied the preliminary injunction, stating that the plaintiffs failed to show irreparable harm or a likelihood of success on the merits. The decision highlighted that Title I primarily addresses direct discrimination in voting rights, not challenges to uniformly applied eligibility requirements, which are typically governed by Title IV's post-election enforcement by the Secretary of Labor. The Court also suggested the plaintiffs exhaust internal union remedies.

Union ElectionsLMRDA Title ILMRDA Title IVCandidate EligibilityMeeting Attendance RulesPreliminary InjunctionEqual RightsUnion BylawsInternal Union RemediesJudicial Review
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Transport Workers Union of America v. Transport Workers Union of Greater New York, Local 100

This case involves a dispute between the Transport Workers Union of America (TWU), a national union, and its local affiliate, Local 100. TWU initiated the action to compel Local 100 to adhere to its Appeals Committee's decisions regarding a contested election. Local 100 counterclaimed for reimbursement of costs incurred from re-running elections, alleging TWU breached its constitution and violated the LMRDA through the actions of its president and Appeals Committee. The court ultimately dismissed Local 100's counterclaim, ruling that TWU's actions were not the proximate cause of Local 100's expenditures for election monitors or re-run elections, as Local 100 voluntarily chose to incur these costs.

Labor union electionUnion governanceInternal disputeCampaign rulesElection irregularitiesLMRDAFiduciary dutyBreach of union constitutionProximate causationSummary judgment
References
4
Case No. 97 Civ. 8830(SAS)
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 1998

Waterman v. Transport Workers' Union Local 100

Plaintiff Andre Waterman, a bus driver, was terminated after testing positive for cocaine. He filed an action against Transport Workers’ Union Local 100 for breach of fair representation and against Malcolm Goldstein and O’Donnell Schwartz Glanstein & Rosen for legal malpractice. The defendants moved for summary judgment. The court granted the defendants' motion, dismissing the claim against the union on grounds of res judicata and the six-month statute of limitations. The malpractice claim against Goldstein and his firm was also dismissed, as the court found that union attorneys acting as agents of the union in collective bargaining agreement contexts are immune from suit by individual union members.

Summary JudgmentBreach of Fair RepresentationLegal MalpracticeRes JudicataStatute of LimitationsUnion ImmunityAttorney ImmunityDrug TestingEmployment TerminationCollective Bargaining Agreement
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stephenson v. Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Union Local 100 of AFL-CIO

The case involves two plaintiffs, Albert Stephenson and Leroy Hodge, who were terminated from their union organizer and business agent positions by Local 100 and HEREIU in 1992. They filed age discrimination complaints, alleging derogatory comments and a desire for 'young blood.' The defendants argued the terminations were for cause due to an FBI investigation into corruption, bribery, and RICO violations within the union, implicating the plaintiffs. After a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, the Appellate Division reversed, finding defendants presented legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for termination that plaintiffs failed to prove were pretextual. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, concluding that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the jury's verdict.

Age DiscriminationWrongful TerminationLabor LawUnion CorruptionRICO ViolationsPretextPrima Facie CaseBurden of ProofNew York CourtsAppellate Review
References
12
Case No. 2012-385
Regular Panel Decision
May 31, 2012

Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v. Transport Workers Union of Am., Local 100

This document pertains to a legal matter heard by the Court of Appeals of New York. The case involved the New York City Transit Authority and the Transport Workers Union of America, Local 100. A motion for leave to appeal was filed. On May 31, 2012, the Court decided to deny this motion.

Transit AuthorityWorkers UnionMotion PracticeLeave to AppealAppellate Procedure
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stephenson v. Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Union Local 100

This is a dissenting opinion concerning an age discrimination lawsuit brought by Albert Stephenson and Leroy Hodge against the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union Local 100 and the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union. The plaintiffs were fired in 1992, and a jury found in their favor, awarding substantial damages. The majority opinion reversed this verdict, but the dissenting judge, Mazzarelli, argues that the evidence presented at trial was legally sufficient to support the jury's finding of age discrimination. The dissent reviews the trial proceedings, jury instructions, evidentiary rulings, and damage awards, concluding that the jury had a rational basis for its decision. While affirming liability, the dissent suggests remanding the case for a collateral source hearing to determine potential offsets to the damages.

Age DiscriminationEmployment LawWrongful TerminationJury VerdictAppellate ReviewLegal SufficiencyBurden of ProofPretextDamagesFront Pay
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 26, 2007

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA LOCAL 100 AFL-CIO v. Schwartz

The Transport Workers Union of America Local 100 AFL-CIO filed a motion for reargument of a motion for leave to appeal, which was subsequently denied by the New York Court of Appeals. Additionally, the motion for leave to appeal itself was also denied. The decision was made on April 26, 2007.

Labor LawUnionMotion for ReargumentLeave to AppealCourt of AppealsAppellate PracticeDenialWorkers' RightsAFL-CIOProcedural Decision
References
5
Case No. Action No. 1; Action No. 2
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 04, 2005

Transport Workers Union of America Local 100 v. Schwartz

This case consolidates two appeals arising from a 1985 real estate exchange involving Transport Workers Union of America Local 100 AFL-CIO (TWU) and 80 W.E.T.H. Corp. (80 WETH). Action No. 1 targeted real estate agents Alan G. Schwartz, Glen Allen Associates, Ltd., and Glen Equities, Ltd. for breach of fiduciary duty, contract, and constructive fraud. Action No. 2 was against attorney Richard L. O’Hara for breach of fiduciary duty and actual fraud. The court affirmed summary judgment for the Schwartz defendants, ruling claims time-barred under the statute of limitations, rejecting continuous representation and equitable estoppel. In the O'Hara action, breach of fiduciary duty claims were also dismissed as time-barred, but the actual fraud claim, initially preserved, was modified on appeal to be dismissed for 80 WETH. The disputes centered on undisclosed fees and potential conflicts of interest during the 1985 transaction.

Real Estate LawStatute of LimitationsBreach of Fiduciary DutySummary JudgmentEquitable EstoppelContinuous Representation DoctrineBrokerage FeesAttorney MisconductActual FraudConstructive Fraud
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fifth Avenue Coach Lines, Inc. v. Transport Workers of America, Local 100

Plaintiffs Fifth Avenue Coach Lines, Inc. and Surface Transit, Inc. sued Transport Workers of America, Local 100, Transport Workers of America, and Michael J. Quill for damages alleging a breach of collective bargaining agreements following a 1962 strike. The Union defendants moved for a stay of proceedings pending arbitration, arguing the dispute fell within the arbitration clauses of their agreements. Defendant Michael J. Quill moved to dismiss the action against him, contending that Section 301(a) of the Taft-Hartley Act does not permit actions against individual union officers. The court found the arbitration clauses sufficiently broad to cover the strike issue and granted the stay of proceedings. Additionally, the court granted Quill's motion to dismiss, citing Supreme Court precedent that such actions are against the union, not its president.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementStrikeTaft-Hartley ActMotion to StayMotion to DismissUnion LiabilityIndividual LiabilityNo-Strike ClauseGrievance Procedure
References
4
Case No. 452726/24
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 05, 2026

Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v. Local 100, Transp. Workers Union

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the New York County Supreme Court, which granted the petition to vacate an arbitration award and denied the grievance. The case involved the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) and Local 100, Transport Workers Union. The Supreme Court correctly determined that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by rewriting the parties' collective bargaining agreement. Specifically, the arbitrator implicitly added a new term regarding the scheduling of hearings within 30 "calendar days" before returning an employee to payroll, which contradicted the contract's provision for "30 days," where non-working days are excluded. This interpretation impermissibly limited NYCTA's time to schedule a hearing.

Arbitration AwardVacaturCollective Bargaining AgreementPublic PolicyArbitrator AuthorityContract InterpretationPre-Disciplinary SuspensionTime CalculationJudicial ReviewAppellate Division First Department
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 1,662 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