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. 71 Civ. 2381
Regular Panel Decision
May 27, 1971

Botany Industries, Inc. v. New York Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America

Botany Industries, Inc., an employer, sought to vacate a labor arbitration award, while the New York Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, the union, sought its confirmation and enforcement. The dispute arose from a 1966 agreement between Botany and the Joint Board, which restricted Botany from doing business with non-union manufacturers of boys', students', and junior clothing and from licensing its 'Botany' trademark under similar conditions. Botany argued these provisions constituted an illegal 'hot cargo' agreement under section 8(e) of the Labor Management Relations Act. The union contended the agreement was protected by the 'garment industry exemption' or was a 'work preservation clause.' The court, presided over by Chief Judge Edelstein, found it had jurisdiction to review the award. It determined Botany did not fall under the garment industry exemption, nor was the agreement a valid work preservation clause. Consequently, the court held the agreement void and unenforceable, thereby vacating Arbitrator Gray's award.

Labor LawArbitration AwardHot Cargo ClauseGarment Industry ExemptionCollective Bargaining AgreementJudicial ReviewUnfair Labor PracticeUnion AgreementContract EnforcementTrademark Licensing
References
40
Case No. ADJ4094302 (AHM 0101287)
Regular
Jun 08, 2010

ROBERT STAMPS vs. KENNY-SHEA-TRAYLOR-FRONTIER-KEMPER JOINT VENTURE; AIG SERVICES, INC.

This case concerns a supplemental attorney's fee award for the applicant's attorney, John M. Urban, under Labor Code §5801. The Court of Appeal denied the defendant's petition for writ of review, finding no reasonable basis and remanding for attorney's fees. Applicant's attorney requested $5400.00 for 18 hours of work at $300 per hour, which the Board found reasonable. The Board awarded the requested amount to John M. Urban against the defendant joint venture.

ADJ4094302SUPPLEMENTAL ATTORNEY'S FEESLABOR CODE §5801Court of Appeal Fourth Appellate Districtpetition for writ of reviewno reasonable basisremandattorney's feesapplicant's attorneyJohn M. Urban
References
1
Case No. ADJ4403161
Regular
Apr 04, 2013

LORENA IBARRA vs. BOONE INTERNATIONAL, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a joint and several award against Boone International and its carrier. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found the petition for reconsideration was not properly verified and lacked merit. The WCJ concluded that defendant Select Personnel and its carrier were properly included in the joint and several award under Labor Code § 5500.5(c), as they were joined as parties before the applicant's election against Boone International. The Board affirmed that Select's rights to contribution proceedings under Labor Code § 5500.5(e) remain available.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardContinuous TraumaJoint and Several AwardLabor Code § 5500.5Petition for ReconsiderationStipulation with Request for AwardDue ProcessApportionment of LiabilityRight of ContributionEmployer Joinder
References
0
Case No. ADJ3588884 (FRE 0222309) ADJ4330880 (FRE 0223217)
Regular
Feb 22, 2011

ENEDELIA LUNA vs. FRESNO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT; AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered By BROADSPIRE

This case concerns American Motorists Insurance Company's petition for reconsideration of a Joint Findings and Award. The original award addressed two admitted industrial injuries sustained by the applicant, one against Fresno Unified School District (FUSD) and another against United Artists Theatre Circuit, insured by American Motorists. The petition specifically challenges the WCJ's failure to incorporate a stipulated liability apportionment between the defendants into the award. The Appeals Board denied the petition, ruling that the WCJ correctly deferred the issue of contribution between co-defendants, as they remain jointly and severally liable to the applicant.

Petition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardSpecial Education Teacher's AideCumulative InjuryBilateral Upper ExtremitiesPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical TreatmentPermissibly Self-InsuredStipulated Percentage of LiabilityContribution Between Co-Defendants
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2003

At & T Corp. v. Tyco Telecommunications (U.S.) Inc.

This order from District Judge Marrero confirms an arbitration award concerning a dispute between AT & T Corp. (as co-maintenance authority for TAT-10 submarine cable owners) and Tyco Telecommunications (U.S.) Inc. Tyco had previously admitted liability for severing the TAT-10 cable in 1998, leading to an arbitration panel awarding the Cable Owners $5,798,075.83 plus interest. Tyco sought to vacate this award, challenging the Panel's legal interpretations regarding a private cause of action under the Cable Convention, the common ownership doctrine, and the inclusion of annual restoration costs as damages. The Court reviewed Tyco's claims for legal error and insufficient discovery, applying a rigorous standard for disturbing arbitration awards. Ultimately, the judge rejected all of Tyco's arguments, finding no manifest disregard of the law or denial of fundamental fairness by the arbitration panel, and confirmed the award in its entirety.

ArbitrationSubmarine CableTelecommunicationsDamagesManifest Disregard of LawStandard of ReviewCable ConventionCable ActLoss of UseRestoration Costs
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 04, 1993

Joint Apprenticeship & Training Council of Local 363 v. New York State Department of Labor

The plaintiff, Joint Apprenticeship and Training Council of Local 363 (JATC), sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) from deactivating its status as a registered apprenticeship training program. JATC argued that deactivation procedures should mirror deregistration, requiring a hearing, and that the Fitzgerald Act provided a private right of action. The court denied the motion, finding no federal requirement for a hearing for deactivation and distinguishing it from deregistration, which has more severe consequences. Furthermore, the court concluded that the Fitzgerald Act does not create a private right of action for program sponsors. The court also found no irreparable harm to the plaintiff or its apprentices, as apprentices could transfer to other programs without losing credit, and the JATC program could re-register or continue unregistered.

Preliminary InjunctionApprenticeship ProgramDeactivationDeregistrationNew York State Department of LaborFitzgerald ActPrivate Right of ActionIrreparable HarmFederal RegulationsState Regulations
References
11
Case No. 03-27303
Regular Panel Decision
May 14, 2004

In Re Ambotiene

Richard J. McCord, as Chapter 7 trustee for Aldona Ambotiene, sought attorneys' fees and costs from Grand Street Realty, LLC and its counsel due to their obstruction of the Trustee's efforts to inspect the Debtor's assets. The Landlord repeatedly refused access to the premises, forcing the Trustee to file a motion to compel. The Court found that the Landlord and its counsel did not act in good faith and caused the Trustee to incur unnecessary expenses in fulfilling his statutory and fiduciary duties. Consequently, the Court granted the Trustee an award of $6,987 in attorneys' fees and $166.79 in costs, totaling $7,253.79, to be paid jointly and severally by the Landlord and its counsel.

Attorneys' FeesCosts AwardedChapter 7 BankruptcyTrustee DutiesCreditor ObstructionSanctionsBankruptcy Code Section 105Good Faith RequirementAsset InspectionFiduciary Duty
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kruse v. Sands Brothers & Co., Ltd.

Peter Kruse petitioned the court to confirm a securities industry arbitration award of $300,960.08 against Sands Brothers & Co. and Peter Pak, who had failed to pay the award issued on June 18, 2002. Respondents filed a counter-petition to vacate the award. The court found that the respondents' challenge was improperly filed as a 'Counter-Petition to Vacate' rather than a formal motion, and also untimely, as it missed the three-month statutory deadline for seeking vacatur. Citing the narrow grounds for vacating arbitration awards under the Federal Arbitration Act and the strong federal policy favoring their enforcement, the court confirmed Kruse's award against Sands and Pak, jointly and severally. The court also granted post-award interest at a rate of 9% from July 18, 2002, until payment.

Arbitration Award ConfirmationFederal Arbitration Act (FAA)Vacatur MotionTimeliness of MotionSecurities ArbitrationPost-Award InterestJudicial Review of Arbitration AwardsDistrict Court DecisionArbitrator AuthorityDue Process
References
44
Case No. ADJ7048560
Regular
Nov 28, 2011

PARVEENA PRASAD vs. SACRAMENTO BEE/McCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS, INC.

This case involves sanctions imposed against lien claimant Accident Injury & Family Therapy (AIFT), its representative Innovative Medical Management (IMM), and Louis Heard for failing to attend two mandatory settlement conferences. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reversed a prior decision that allowed AIFT's lien, finding the lien claimant's excuses for non-appearance unpersuasive despite the loss of the lien itself. The WCAB sanctioned AIFT, IMM, and Heard jointly and severally $800 and awarded defendant its reasonable costs and fees incurred due to the missed appearances.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDecision After RemovalSanctionsCosts and FeesAccident Injury & Family TherapyInnovative Medical ManagementLouis HeardLabor Code Section 5813Utilization ReviewCompromise and Release
References
1
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 08012
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 29, 2020

Perez v. Masonry Servs., Inc.

This case, Perez v Masonry Services, Inc., concerns a lawsuit brought by Adrian Perez and others against Masonry Services, Inc. (MSI), Manuel J. Herrera, James Herrera, and Lettire Construction Corp. The plaintiffs alleged a breach of contract to pay prevailing wages, as mandated by the Davis-Bacon Act, for work on a federally financed construction project. The Supreme Court, New York County, found in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding them joint and several damages. The court also permitted Lettire Construction Corp. to assert alter ego and veil piercing claims against MSI, Manuel, and James. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, concluding that the record supported the finding that Manuel and James abused the corporate form to avoid wage payments and that joint and several liability was properly imposed.

Prevailing WageDavis-Bacon ActBreach of ContractAlter EgoVeil PiercingJoint and Several LiabilityConstruction ProjectCorporate Form AbusePayroll RecordsDamages Award
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 9,399 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