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

O'Hare v. General Marine Transport Corp.

In this opinion, the District Court denied General Marine Transport Corporation's motion to amend a prior judgment that awarded damages to the Trustees of the New York Marine Towing and Transportation Industry Pension Fund and Insurance Fund. General Marine sought to amend the judgment based on the recent Supreme Court ruling in DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, arguing for the application of a six-month limitations period. The court determined that DelCostello specifically applies to "hybrid 301/fair representation" claims and does not necessitate a departure from the previously applied six-year New York state statute of limitations for breach of contract actions, citing Auto Workers v. Hoosier Corp. Therefore, the motion was denied, reaffirming the earlier decision.

Motion to Amend JudgmentStatute of LimitationsLabor LawBreach of ContractFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureNational Labor Relations ActLabor Management Relations ActHybrid 301/Fair Representation ClaimsPension FundInsurance Fund
References
16
Case No. ADJ10612927
Regular
Jul 30, 2018

ROBERT O'NEAL vs. MARTEN TRANSPORT LIMITED, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, CANNON COCHRAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INCORPORATED

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Marten Transport's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the finding of industrial injury to the applicant's neck and lumbar spine, based on medical evidence of immediate complaints and the doctor's opinion of causation. The Board also upheld the denial of apportionment, as no reporting physician found a basis for it and the defendant failed to prove apportionment despite opportunities. The original award included temporary and permanent disability, plus further medical treatment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMarten Transport LimitedAce American Insurance CompanyCannon Cochran Management Servicesindustrial injuryneck injurylumbar spine injurytemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityapportionment
References
2
Case No. CIV-88-1404C, CIV-90-481C
Regular Panel Decision

CSX Transportation, Inc. v. United Transportation Union

CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) initiated the sale of a 369-mile rail line, which threatened the jobs of 226 employees. In response, the United Transportation Union and American Train Dispatchers Association (the Unions) invoked the Railway Labor Act (RLA) § 6, seeking to negotiate labor-protective provisions and preserve the status quo. The district court initially deemed the dispute 'minor' due to CSXT's plausible contractual defense, allowing the sale to proceed while the matter went to arbitration. A special adjustment board subsequently found CSXT's contractual defense unavailing, concluding that existing agreements did not permit the sale without prior bargaining over employee impacts. This court affirmed the board's jurisdiction and its finding, clarifying that the Unions were indeed entitled to status quo preservation during such bargaining, distinguishing its ruling from other circuits that had broadened management prerogative in partial business sales. The case is now remanded to the board to determine the appropriate remedies for the affected union members.

Railway Labor ActLabor DisputeCollective BargainingStatus QuoLine SaleArbitrationMajor DisputeMinor DisputeManagement PrerogativeEmployee Protection
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Arias-Mieses v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

Carlos Arias-Mieses, a pro se plaintiff, sued his former employer, CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), under Title VII for discriminatory termination, unequal employment terms, and retaliation. CSXT moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing it was time-barred by the statute of limitations. The Court found that Arias-Mieses's termination on July 9, 2007, started the 300-day period for filing with the EEOC. His complaint was not forwarded to the EEOC until July 31, 2008, which was beyond the 300-day limit. The Court denied equitable tolling or estoppel and granted CSXT's motion to dismiss because the claim was time-barred.

Title VIICivil Rights Act of 1964Employment DiscriminationRetaliationDiscriminatory TerminationStatute of LimitationsEEOC FilingEquitable TollingMotion to DismissPro Se Litigant
References
30
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 01785
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 2017

Henvill v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Winston Henvill appealed the dismissal of his complaint and the denial of his petition to vacate an arbitration award, which resulted in the termination of his employment. The Supreme Court had granted defendants' motion to dismiss Henvill's complaint and denied his petition seeking to vacate the arbitration award based on a finding of misconduct. Henvill argued that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police Benevolent Association (PBA) breached its duty of fair representation and that the arbitrator's fact-finding was irrational. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decisions, finding no evidence that the PBA's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Furthermore, the court emphasized that judicial review of arbitration awards is limited to statutory grounds and does not permit reviewing the arbitrator's findings of fact.

Breach of Duty of Fair RepresentationArbitration AwardEmployment TerminationMisconductCPLR Article 75Vacatur of Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementAppellate ReviewJudicial Review of ArbitrationLabor Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 13, 2012

Thompson v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

The defendants, Staten Island Rapid Transit Operating Authority, MTA Staten Island Railway, and Tyesha Witt, appealed a Supreme Court order denying their motion for summary judgment to dismiss a personal injury action as time-barred. The plaintiff's decedent was injured in a railway accident in February 2008 and filed a complaint in March 2009. The defendants argued the action was time-barred under Public Authorities Law § 1276, which mandates a one-year-and-30-day statute of limitations. The plaintiff, Sarah Thompson, argued the statute of limitations was tolled under CPLR 208 due to the decedent's alleged

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsTime-barredCPLR 208Insanity TollPublic Authorities LawRailway AccidentAppellate ReviewLegal Procedure
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Arbitration Between Halcot Navigation Limited Partnership and Stolt-Nielsen Transportation Group

Halcot Navigation Limited Partnership (Halcot) sought to vacate a partial arbitration award from August 4, 2006, which allowed Anthony Radcliffe Steamship Company Limited (a non-signatory) to assert claims against Halcot in arbitration. Halcot argued that the arbitrability of the claim should be decided by the court, not the arbitrators. Respondents (Anthony Radcliffe and Stolt-Nielsen Transportation Group B.V.) cross-moved to confirm the award, contending Halcot waived its right to object by submitting the issue to arbitration. The court found that Halcot waived its right to independent review by actively participating and briefing the arbitrability issue before the arbitration panel. Even if there was no waiver, the court independently concluded that Anthony Radcliffe could compel arbitration based on equitable estoppel, as the issues were intertwined with the Time Charter agreement between Halcot and Stolt-Nielsen. Therefore, the court DENIED Halcot’s petition to vacate and GRANTED respondents’ motion to confirm the Arbitration Award.

Arbitration AwardVacate Arbitration AwardConfirm Arbitration AwardNew York ConventionFederal Arbitration ActArbitrabilityWaiver of RightsEquitable EstoppelNon-Signatory ArbitrationTime Charter Agreement
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Decker v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

Plaintiffs, including the United Transportation Union and Local 377, initiated an action in state court against CSX Transport, Inc. (CSXT), alleging violations of the Railway Labor Act's status quo provisions related to CSXT's planned sale of a rail line. CSXT moved for dismissal, contending that the plaintiffs' notice was barred by a national agreement moratorium, Local 377 lacked standing, the carrier held a unilateral right to sell lines, and the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) preempted RLA Section 6. Conversely, plaintiffs asserted that the National Mediation Board had docketed their dispute as major, the sale was a tactic to circumvent RLA provisions, and the moratorium did not apply to them due to local bargaining representation. The court, drawing parallels with Railway Labor Executives’ Association v. Staten Island Railroad Corp., determined that the ICC's authorization of the sale brought the matter under its exclusive jurisdiction. Consequently, the court found itself unable to provide a remedy without interfering with the ICC's order and granted CSXT's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.

Railway Labor ActStatus Quo ProvisionsMotion to DismissRail Line SaleInterstate Commerce CommissionPreemptionCollective BargainingLabor DisputeInjunctive ReliefJurisdiction
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 24, 2013

Rosario v. Local 1106 Transport Works of America

Plaintiff Louis Rosario sued his former employer, Transervice Lease Corporation, and his union, Transport Workers of America, Local 1106, alleging wrongful termination and inadequate union representation under the LMRA. Rosario's employment was terminated after he was accused of falsifying documents related to a vehicle repair. His union, Local 1106, failed to file for arbitration within the required 45-day period, leading an arbitrator to deem the grievance non-arbitrable in December 2010. Rosario filed his complaint in January 2013, more than two years after the arbitration denial. The Court granted Transervice's motion to dismiss, finding Rosario's hybrid § 301 LMRA claim time-barred by the six-month statute of limitations. The Court also dismissed the federal claim against Local 1106 sua sponte and declined supplemental jurisdiction over Rosario's state-law negligence claim against the union, dismissing it without prejudice.

Hybrid § 301 LMRAWrongful TerminationBreach of Duty of Fair RepresentationStatute of LimitationsMotion to DismissCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrationEquitable EstoppelFederal JurisdictionState Law Claim
References
25
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
Showing 1-10 of 3,692 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