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

Board of Education of Yonkers City School District v. Yonkers Municipal Civil Service Commission

The Board of Education of the Yonkers City School District initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to review the Yonkers Municipal Civil Service Commission's determination. The Commission had reinstated Michael DeMuro, a custodial worker, after charges of incompetence and misconduct. This case is a further review following a prior remittal where the Commission violated Civil Service Law § 76 (2) by considering external evidence. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, annulled the Commission's latest determination and transferred the case. This Court (Appellate Division) found the transfer improper as the 'substantial evidence' standard was not applicable. The Court annulled the Commission's determination, vacated the Supreme Court's judgment, denied the cross-petition, and remitted the matter to the Commission for a third determination in strict compliance with Civil Service Law § 76.

Civil Service LawCPLR Article 78Administrative LawJudicial ReviewDue ProcessRemittalAnnulmentDisciplinary ProceedingCustodial WorkerIncompetence
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stalter v. Board of Cooperative Educational Services

Plaintiff James D. Stalter, Jr. sued the Board of Cooperative Educational Services of Rockland County (BOCES) under the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York Executive Law, alleging discrimination due to his cerebral palsy and speech impediment. BOCES moved for summary judgment, arguing Stalter was not disabled, did not suffer an adverse employment decision, and his claims were untimely filed with the EEOC. The District Court, presided over by Judge McMahon, denied BOCES's motion, finding genuine issues of material fact on all key arguments. The court determined that Stalter's inability to speak constituted a substantial limitation of a major life activity, and there was sufficient evidence that BOCES regarded him as disabled. Furthermore, the court found factual disputes regarding whether Stalter was denied overtime and a shift change, and if the continuing violation doctrine or equitable tolling applied to his EEOC complaint's timeliness.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)Disability DiscriminationSummary JudgmentCerebral PalsySpeech ImpairmentEmployment DiscriminationAdverse Employment ActionEEOCStatute of LimitationsContinuing Violation
References
32
Case No. ADJ1029994 (LBO 0391256)
Regular
Sep 09, 2004

WALTER PEARCE vs. LAIDLAW EDUCATION SERVICES, SEDGWICK CMS

This order dismisses Laidlaw Education Services' and Sedgwick CMS' petition for removal. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board adopted and incorporated the administrative law judge's report in reaching this decision. The petition for removal is therefore dismissed.

Petition for RemovalDismissalReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportLAIDLAW EDUCATION SERVICESSEDGWICK CMSADJ1029994LBO 0391256
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cayuga-Onondaga Counties Board of Cooperative Educational Services v. Sweeney

The Cayuga-Onondaga Counties Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) contracted with the Auburn City School District for a lighting project, employing school district staff as temporary laborers without prevailing wages or overtime. The Commissioner of Labor found BOCES violated Labor Law § 220, mandating prevailing wages for public work. BOCES appealed, asserting the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction due to unfulfilled notice of claim and statute of limitations requirements under Education Law § 3813, and claiming an exemption based on civil service classification. The court affirmed, ruling that prevailing wage enforcement serves a public interest, thereby exempting it from Education Law's procedural bars. Furthermore, the court determined the civil service exemption did not apply to ungraded employees.

Public Work ProjectsPrevailing WageLabor Law § 220Education Law § 3813Notice of ClaimStatute of LimitationsCivil Service ClassificationJurisdictionPublic Interest DoctrineOvertime Wages
References
65
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 21, 1982

Parochial Bus Systems, Inc. v. Board of Education

Parochial Bus Systems, Inc. (Parochial) contracted with the Board of Education of the City of New York (Board) to transport students. During a wildcat strike, Parochial ceased services, citing safety concerns due to violence and picketing. The Board, however, maintained that Parochial could have provided service with police protection and found alternative transportation. Parochial sought payment under a "Cessation of Service" clause, which the Board denied, also raising an affirmative defense regarding non-compliance with Education Law § 3813. The Special Term initially dismissed the defense and denied summary judgment, but the appellate court modified this, finding that Parochial did not substantially comply with its contractual obligations to "attempt" service, despite police protection offers. Ultimately, the court granted the Board's motion, dismissing both Parochial's and co-plaintiff Local 100's complaints.

Contract DisputeTransportation ServicesWildcat StrikeBreach of ContractEducation LawNotice of ClaimSubstantial ComplianceSummary JudgmentImpossibility of PerformancePicket Line
References
5
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00945 [213 AD3d 548]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 21, 2023

Matter of Clarke v. Board of Educ. of the City Sch.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's dismissal of petitions challenging the New York City Department of Education's (DOE) COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Petitioners, employees placed on leave without pay for non-compliance, had sought to annul the DOE's determinations and vacate an arbitration award. The court found that the vaccine mandate was a valid qualification of employment, unrelated to job performance or misconduct, and therefore did not constitute disciplinary action. Furthermore, it ruled that the arbitrator's authority stemmed from the Civil Service Law, not the collective bargaining agreement or Education Law, and petitioners lacked standing to challenge the arbitration award. The court also determined that petitioners' due process rights were not violated, as they were offered opportunities for exemptions and accommodations.

COVID-19 vaccine mandateleave without payCPLR Article 75CPLR Article 78arbitration awardpublic policy violationdue process rightsemployment qualificationteacher disciplineCivil Service Law
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 1982

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of Connetquot Central School District & Connetquot Teachers Ass'n

This dissenting opinion argues for affirming a Special Term's order directing a board of education to arbitrate a grievance filed by a teachers union. The union's claim involves continued use of office space in school district buildings, citing a collective bargaining agreement and past practice. The dissent contends that the arbitration clause is broad and encompasses the dispute, rejecting the employer's argument that law or public policy (specifically Education Law § 414 or Civil Service Law § 209-a) prohibits arbitration of this grievance. Justice O'Connor asserts that the union's use of office space for its statutory duties as a collective bargaining agent serves a "school purpose," similar to administrative and support services, and thus is not excluded by Education Law § 414. The dissent concludes that the order compelling arbitration should be affirmed.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceTeachers UnionBoard of EducationOffice SpaceSchool PropertyEducation LawCivil Service LawPublic Employment Relations Board
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 1981

Greenspan v. Dutchess County Board of Cooperative Educational Services

The case concerns a CPLR article 78 proceeding initiated by a petitioner against the Dutchess County Board of Cooperative Educational Services. The petitioner, whose position as co-ordinator of pupil services was abolished, sought reassignment to existing or newly created positions based on seniority and similarity of duties under Education Law § 2510. Special Term dismissed the petition, ruling the positions were not in the same tenure area nor involved similar duties. On appeal, the court rejected the petitioner's constitutional argument and her reliance on 8 NYCRR 30.8(a)(7) for administrative tenure areas. However, the appellate court determined that triable issues of fact existed regarding the similarity of duties between the petitioner's abolished role and the sought-after positions under both subdivisions of Education Law § 2510. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, the petition reinstated, and the matter was remitted to the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, for a hearing on these factual issues.

CPLR Article 78Reassignment RightsAbolished PositionTenure AreaEducation Law Section 2510Similarity of DutiesAdministrative TenureSupervisory AppointmentsDutchess County BOCESJudicial Review
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Plaintiff Volt Technical Services Corp. applied for H-2 visas for nuclear start-up technicians, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) denied, asserting the need was permanent, not temporary. After the denial was affirmed on appeal, Volt filed suit, alleging the INS's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the INS's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act § 101(a)(15)(H)(ii), which requires the employer's need for services to be temporary, not just the individual assignments. Finding that Volt demonstrated a recurring need for such technicians over several years, the court granted the INS's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Volt's.

Immigration LawH-2 visasNonimmigrant WorkersTemporary EmploymentImmigration and Nationality ActAdministrative Procedures ActDeclaratory Judgment ActAgency InterpretationJudicial ReviewNuclear Industry
References
5
Case No. 89 N.Y.2d 395
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 20, 1996

CAYUGA-ONONDAGA BD v. Sweeney

In a case brought by the Commissioner of Labor, the Cayuga-Onondaga Counties Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) was found to have violated Labor Law § 220 by failing to pay prevailing wages to employees on a lighting improvement project for the Auburn City School District. BOCES appealed, arguing that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction due to the failure to file a timely notice of claim and adhere to the statute of limitations under Education Law § 3813. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, holding that prevailing wage enforcement proceedings under Labor Law § 220 vindicate a public interest, making the notice of claim and statute of limitations requirements of Education Law § 3813 inapplicable. The Court also rejected BOCES' argument that the employees' civil service classification exempted them from prevailing wage requirements.

Prevailing wagePublic worksLabor LawEducation LawNotice of claimStatute of limitationsPublic interest doctrineCivil serviceMunicipal contractsSchool district liability
References
44
Showing 1-10 of 7,566 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