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. 94 Civ. 2336
Regular Panel Decision

Mohamed v. Marriott International, Inc.

Ahmed Mohamed, a profoundly deaf individual, sued Marriott International, Inc. and Marriott Corporation under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and New York State Human Rights Law for wrongful discharge. Marriott moved for summary judgment, arguing Mohamed should be judicially estopped from asserting an ADA claim because he had previously applied for Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits (SSDI), stating he was unable to work. The court denied Marriott's motion. It ruled that judicial estoppel was inappropriate given the differing legal standards between ADA and SSDI, the nature of SSDI administrative determinations (paper application for a listed disability), and the policy goals of the ADA which encourage disabled individuals to seek employment. The court found ample evidence that Mohamed was able to perform the essential functions of his job.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)Judicial EstoppelSummary JudgmentDisability DiscriminationSocial Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)New York State Human Rights LawEmployment LawQualified Individual with a DisabilityReasonable AccommodationDeafness
References
32
Case No. ADJ8377055
Regular
Dec 13, 2012

MARIA PEREZ vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, MARRIOTT CLAIMS SERVICES

This case involves a petition for removal filed by a party in **Maria Perez v. Marriott International; Marriott Claims Services**. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued an order dismissing this petition. The dismissal is due to the petitioner's withdrawal of their request for removal. Therefore, the Board has formally closed the matter regarding the petition for removal.

Petition for RemovalDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantMarriott InternationalMarriott Claims ServicesADJ8377055San Jose District OfficeDecision November 13 2012
References
0
Case No. 83 Civ. 2059
Regular Panel Decision

Perry v. International Transport Workers' Federation

This case addresses a complex labor dispute between plaintiffs William Perry (President of Local 6, International Longshoremen’s Association) and International Shipping Association (ISA) against defendant International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF). Plaintiffs alleged antitrust violations under the Clayton and Sherman Acts, alongside state law claims for tortious interference with contractual rights, primarily concerning ITF’s 'blacking' policy on 'flag of convenience' vessels. ITF cross-claimed for antitrust violations, tortious interference, unfair competition, and trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant on the plaintiffs’ antitrust claim, citing a statutory labor exemption for ITF's activities, and dismissed ITF's antitrust counterclaim. While denying summary judgment on most tortious interference claims due to factual disputes, the court granted summary judgment to defendant on ISA’s tortious interference claim and to plaintiff Local 6 on ITF’s counterclaim for tortious interference with contractual relations. Furthermore, the court denied the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the damages portion of the defendant's Lanham Act counterclaim.

Antitrust LawLabor DisputesSummary JudgmentTortious InterferenceLanham ActSherman ActClayton ActNorris-LaGuardia ActFlag of Convenience VesselsCollective Bargaining
References
55
Case No. 00-CV-1161
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2000

Gallagher v. INTERNATIONAL BROTH. OF ELEC. WORKERS

Plaintiff Michael Gallagher sued several entities, including the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and its President J.J. Barry, alleging age discrimination in employment referrals and retaliation through IBEW Local Union No. 43's hiring hall. Gallagher claimed the collective bargaining agreement facilitated discrimination against older workers and that Local 43 was an agent of the International defendants. The defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that Gallagher failed to name the International defendants in his EEOC charge, thus failing to exhaust administrative remedies and that no identity of interest existed between the named and unnamed parties. The court granted the motion, dismissing the claims against the International defendants due to Gallagher's failure to file an administrative complaint against them and the lack of an agency relationship or ratification of discriminatory acts. Furthermore, the court found the claims to be time-barred under both state and federal statutes of limitations.

Age DiscriminationEmployment LawLabor UnionCollective Bargaining AgreementEEOCNYSDHRExhaustion of Administrative RemediesFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c)Judgment on PleadingsStatute of Limitations
References
32
Case No. ADJ8119563
Regular
Dec 05, 2016

MARTHA HERRERA vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Marriott International (Defendant) with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB denied the petition, finding that removal is an extraordinary remedy that requires a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board concluded that the applicant, Martha Herrera, did not demonstrate such harm, nor did she prove that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, the WCAB adopted the WCJ's report and denied the removal petition.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationExtraordinary RemedyWCJ ReportDeniedCase No. ADJ8119563Marriott International
References
0
Case No. ADJ1967938
Regular
Oct 18, 2012

MARITZA RENGIFO vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

Defendant Marriott International filed an untimely petition for removal seeking a determination of liability for applicant's self-procured medical treatment outside their alleged Medical Provider Network (MPN). The Appeals Board, while dismissing the petition due to untimeliness, granted removal on its own motion. The Board found the WCJ erred in deeming the MPN and self-procured treatment issues premature lien issues. The Board rescinded the WCJ's order taking the case off calendar and directed the matter be set for trial promptly to adjudicate the MPN and treatment liability.

Removal PetitionMPNSelf-Procured TreatmentLabor Code 4903.6(b)Labor Code 4616WCAB Rule 10843(a)Untimely FilingGrant RemovalOwn MotionDecision After Removal
References
0
Case No. SDO 0336567
Regular
Dec 26, 2007

MARIA GUTIERREZ vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Marriott International, Inc.'s petition for reconsideration of an award based on stipulations. The dismissal was primarily due to the petition's lack of mandatory verification as required by statute. Furthermore, the Board found no good cause to set aside the parties' stipulations, which served as evidence that obviated the need for further proof.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationStipulationsIndustrial InjuryBilateral Upper ExtremitiesNeck InjuryPBX OperatorTemporary Total DisabilityPermanent DisabilityEmployment Development Department (EDD)
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Curry v. American International Group, Inc. Plan No. 502

Curry, a former Regional Insurance Underwriting Manager for AIG, sued American International Group, Inc. Plan No. 502 and American International Life Assurance Co. of New York ("AI Life") under ERISA § 502(a) after her long-term disability benefits were terminated. Curry suffers from degenerative osteoarthritis and diabetes. AI Life initially approved her benefits but later terminated them, alleging she could perform a sedentary occupation, relying on unverified medical responses. The court found AI Life's decision to be arbitrary and capricious due to its reliance on unreliable medical opinions, failure to clarify the record, and disregard for Curry's doctors' reports. Consequently, the court granted Curry's motion for summary judgment, denying the defendants' motion, and ordered the reinstatement of her benefits with prejudgment interest and attorney's fees.

ERISALong-term disabilityBenefits terminationArbitrary and capricious standardConflict of interestMedical opinionUnreliable evidenceSummary judgmentOrthopaedic conditionsDiabetes
References
10
Case No. ADJ2980699 (MON 0351671) ADJ1220548 (MON 0351672)
Regular
Jul 16, 2013

AURA DE LEON vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, PSI and Self-Administered

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by an applicant against Marriott International, PSI, and Self-Administered. The petitioner subsequently withdrew the petition. Consequently, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has ordered the Petition for Removal dismissed as no further action will be taken.

Petition for RemovalWithdrawn PetitionDismissed PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAura De LeonMarriott InternationalPSISelf-AdministeredADJ2980699ADJ1220548
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Curran v. International Union, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers

Plaintiff, an employee of Carborundum Company, suffered a partial hand amputation in a "rubber roll" machine accident on March 8, 1979. He sued his unions, International Union, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers, AFL-CIO, and Abrasive Workers, Local 8-12058, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, alleging state law negligence for failing to safeguard him from dangers and a federal claim for breaching their duty of fair representation. The unions moved for summary judgment, arguing federal law preempts the negligence claim and they did not breach their duty of fair representation. The court granted the unions' motion regarding the negligence claim, ruling that a union's duty to its members, arising from a collective bargaining agreement, is governed exclusively by federal law and does not include a duty of care. However, the court denied the motion regarding the breach of fair representation claim, finding sufficient facts and allegations to infer that the unions may have discharged their duty in an arbitrary, perfunctory manner or in bad faith, thus leaving triable issues of fact.

Union LiabilityDuty of Fair RepresentationNegligence ClaimFederal PreemptionCollective Bargaining AgreementSummary Judgment MotionLabor LawWorkplace AccidentSafety and Health CommitteeArbitrary Union Action
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 1,256 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