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. ADJ8160241, ADJ8160224
Regular
Oct 04, 2012

MIGUEL DOMINGUEZ vs. MYERS CONTAINER,LLC

This case concerns Miguel Dominguez versus Myers Container, LLC, consolidated under Case No. ADJ8160241 and ADJ8160224. A petition for removal was filed by the applicant and subsequently withdrawn. As a result of the withdrawal, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has issued an order dismissing the petition for removal. No further action will be taken on this matter.

Petition for RemovalDismissedWithdrawnWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardMIGUEL DOMINGUEZMYERS CONTAINERLLCCCMSIADJ8160241ADJ8160224
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

International Longshoremen's Ass'n v. Hanjin Container Lines, Ltd.

The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) petitioned the District Court to confirm and enforce arbitration awards totaling $21,000 against Hanjin Container Lines (HCL) and Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd. (Hanjin). These awards stemmed from violations of the “Rules on Containers,” which are part of the ILA-New York Shipping Association (NYSA) collective bargaining agreement, mandating the use of ILA longshoremen for container work. Hanjin challenged the awards, asserting that HCL was not bound by the agreement for earlier awards and that the Rules had been declared illegal by the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). The Court granted ILA’s petition, determining that Hanjin waived jurisdictional objections by participating in arbitration and that various stays issued by the FMC and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals kept the Rules in effect during the period the awards were issued.

Arbitration Award EnforcementLabor LawShipping ActContainer RulesCollective Bargaining AgreementFederal Maritime CommissionJurisdiction WaiverPublic PolicyJudicial StaysWork Preservation Agreement
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Marshall v. Atlantic Container Line, GIE

The Secretary of Labor alleged that Atlantic Container Line (ACL) violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) by involuntarily retiring employees at age 62, while ACL contended these retirements were exempt under ADEA § 4(f)(2). The court had previously denied summary judgment, noting factual questions regarding whether a 1974 amendment to ACL's pension plan constituted a subterfuge to evade the ADEA and if ACL relied in good faith on administrative regulations. Upon review of stipulated facts, the court found no evidence of subterfuge in ACL's plan amendment, which aimed to create promotional opportunities and harmonize retirement ages. Furthermore, ACL successfully established a good faith defense under the Portal-to-Portal Act, having relied on official administrative regulations despite conflicting advice from a Department of Labor representative. Consequently, the defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted.

Age DiscriminationEmployment ActPension PlanSubterfugeGood Faith DefenseSummary JudgmentMandatory RetirementEmployer LiabilityStatutory InterpretationDepartment of Labor
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Myers v. Pension Fund, Local One Amalgamated Lithographers of America

The plaintiff, Mr. Myers, challenged the defendant Pension Fund's decision to provide him with a withdrawal benefit instead of a monthly pension. Myers had left the lithographic industry in 1973 and opted for a vested pension, but the Fund later denied his monthly pension, alleging he returned to the industry without proper notification or resuming contributions. Myers' claims of violations under the Sherman Antitrust Act and New York General Business Law were dismissed, with the latter preempted by ERISA. The court also found that the specific ERISA vesting provisions cited by Myers did not apply to the Fund. However, because new affidavits presented by Myers indicated that one of his employers, ASL, might not be part of the lithographic industry—evidence not considered by the Fund's Trustees—the court remanded the case. The Fund is directed to re-evaluate Myers' eligibility based on whether ASL or Towanda (another employer) are indeed part of the lithographic industry.

ERISAPension BenefitsVesting ProvisionsSummary JudgmentRemandEmployee BenefitsAntitrust LawsState Law PreemptionLithographic IndustryWithdrawal Benefits
References
7
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04809 [140 AD3d 532]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2016

Masi v. Cassone Trailer & Container Co.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, which denied motions for summary judgment by defendant Cassone Leasing Inc. and third-party defendant LKQ Hunts Point Auto Parts Corp. The case involved Anthony Masi's personal injury claims against various defendants, including Cassone Trailer & Container Co. and Cassone Leasing Inc. The court clarified that a prior settlement agreement under Workers' Compensation Law § 32, entered into by Masi and his employer LKQ, only settled workers' compensation claims and did not release personal injury claims against other defendants. Furthermore, a subsequent broad release agreement between Masi and LKQ released claims solely in favor of LKQ, not extending to other defendants in the personal injury suit. The court did not address whether the release barred third-party actions against LKQ, as that issue was not raised below.

Summary judgmentPersonal injury claimsWorkers' Compensation LawSettlement agreementRelease agreementThird-party actionsAppellate reviewDismissal motionScope of releaseEmployer liability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Vargas v. Crown Container Co.

This case concerns an appeal regarding a wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering action. The decedent, a garbage truck helper, sustained fatal injuries. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the order was modified. Summary judgment was granted to Crown Container Co., Inc., Crown Container Transfer Station Co., Inc., and Ashim Ali, based on Workers' Compensation Law exclusivity provisions. Additionally, summary judgment was granted dismissing the negligent spoliation of evidence claim against Crown Container Waste Services Corp., as New York does not recognize such a cause of action. However, the motion for summary judgment was denied for remaining causes of action against Crown Container Waste Services Corp., due to triable issues of fact regarding its interrelationship with the employer and alleged faulty repair.

Wrongful DeathConscious Pain and SufferingSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation LawExclusivity ProvisionsNegligent Spoliation of EvidenceAlter EgoProximate CauseAppellate ReviewEmployer Liability
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hickey v. Myers

Plaintiff Thomas Hickey, a former Dean at SUNY Cobleskill, alleged retaliation under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against SUNY Cobleskill, its former President Donald P. Zingale, and former Provost Anne C. Myers. Hickey claimed he faced adverse actions for opposing the college's admission and retention policies, which he believed constituted racial discrimination by disproportionately affecting African-American students. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The court granted in part and denied in part the motion: dismissing Title VI claims against Myers and Zingale in their individual capacities, and all claims related to Hickey's unsuccessful application for a Provost position at SUNY Delhi. However, the Title VI claim against SUNY Cobleskill and the Section 1981 claim against Myers and Zingale (in their individual capacities) regarding Hickey's removal as Dean remained viable for trial.

RetaliationTitle VISection 1981Racial DiscriminationEmployment DiscriminationSummary JudgmentHigher EducationAdmissions PoliciesRetention PoliciesAcademic Standards
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York City Transit Authority v. State

Mary Myers, a Seventh Day Adventist, was terminated from her employment by the Transit Authority for her refusal to work on Saturdays due to religious observance. Despite the Transit Authority's attempts to accommodate her, the Transport Workers Union's collective bargaining agreement, which prioritized seniority for work assignments and days off, prevented such accommodation without waiving other employees' seniority rights. The Commissioner of Human Rights found Ms. Myers' religious convictions sincere. However, the court, citing precedent regarding union seniority systems, annulled the administrative determination that had supported Ms. Myers. Justice Rubin, in a concurring opinion, criticized the legal framework that exempts union seniority systems from civil rights statutes, arguing for a joint employer and union obligation to reasonably accommodate religious beliefs, especially for quasi-public entities.

Religious discriminationSeniority systemCollective bargaining agreementReasonable accommodationSabbath observanceFreedom of religionFirst AmendmentCivil Rights ActExecutive LawEmployment termination
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Myers v. Secretary of Department of Treasury

The plaintiff, George Myers, an IRS employee, filed several EEO claims for age discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. After being reassignment, he filed a federal complaint alleging discrimination under the ADEA and New York State Executive Law. The defendant, Secretary of the Department of the Treasury, moved for judgment on the pleadings due to Myers's failure to properly serve the summons and complaint as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(i) and 4(m). While acknowledging attorney neglect, the Court, exercising its discretion and considering the expiration of the statute of limitations and the government's prior notice of the claims, denied the motion to dismiss and granted the plaintiff an additional 30 days to effect proper service.

Age DiscriminationHarassmentRetaliationService of ProcessFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(i)Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(m)Motion to DismissStatute of LimitationsAttorney NeglectJudicial Discretion
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Castro v. United Container MacHinery Group, Inc.

This case concerns the interpretation of 'grave injury' under Workers’ Compensation Law § 11, specifically whether the loss of multiple fingertips constitutes such an injury. Marvin Castro suffered the loss of five fingertips in a work accident and initiated a lawsuit against the machine manufacturer, United Container Machinery Group, which subsequently filed a third-party claim against Castro's employer, Southern Container Corp., for contribution and indemnification. Southern sought to dismiss the third-party complaint, arguing that Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 precluded recovery for injuries not classified as grave. The Appellate Division ruled in favor of Southern, granting summary judgment, a decision that the Court of Appeals ultimately affirmed. The Court held that 'loss of multiple fingers' in the statute refers to the total loss of fingers, not partial loss of fingertips, based on plain language and legislative intent.

Workers' Compensation LawGrave InjuryLoss of Multiple FingersPartial Loss of FingersStatutory InterpretationLegislative IntentEmployer LiabilityThird-Party ActionContribution and IndemnificationSummary Judgment
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 337 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