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
May 15, 2006

Land Master Montg I, LLC v. Town of Montgomery

In this case, petitioners Land Master and Roswind Farmland Corp. challenged the Town of Montgomery's new Comprehensive Plan and Local Laws 4 and 5, arguing they constituted unlawful exclusionary zoning and violated the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The court, presided over by Judge Joseph G. Owen, granted the petitioners' motion regarding these claims, declaring the local laws null and void. The decision highlighted the Town's failure to adequately consider local and regional affordable housing needs and to undertake a thorough environmental review. While some of the petitioners' other claims were dismissed, they were awarded attorneys' fees. The court ordered the reinstatement of petitioners' land use applications under the prior zoning laws.

Zoning LawExclusionary ZoningAffordable HousingState Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA)Comprehensive PlanLocal LegislationLand Use PlanningMulti-Family HousingTraffic ImpactJudicial Review
References
19
Case No. 80 Civil 4699
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 1982

Wallace v. INTERN. ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, ETC.

Plaintiff Oscar L. Wallace sued the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots and its Ex. President Capt. Robert J. Lowen after his application for union membership was denied. He alleged wrongful denial of admission, termination of applicant status, denial of due process, equal protection violations, refusal to refer to job assignments, violation of his right to sue, conspiracy, and racial discrimination. The court dismissed most of his claims, including those based on alleged membership rights and civil rights violations, finding he had no vested right to membership and failed to show state action or a conspiracy. However, the court denied the motion to dismiss the claim for breach of fair representation, acknowledging the union's duty to an applicant regarding job referrals.

Union MembershipFair RepresentationDue ProcessCivil RightsFederal JurisdictionMotion to DismissLabor LawConspiracyRacial DiscriminationEmployment Rights
References
38
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 04168 [219 AD3d 1003]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 03, 2023

Matter of Campos v. Performance Master, Inc.

Claimant Denis Campos, a construction worker, filed for workers' compensation benefits after falling from a ladder. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) established the claim and put American Zurich Insurance Company on notice regarding a specific workers' compensation policy. American Zurich contested, arguing the policy was canceled or that other policies applied, but failed to provide evidence for the identified policy despite being directed to do so. The WCLJ determined the policy remained in effect, making American Zurich the liable carrier. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed this decision, declining to consider new evidence submitted by American Zurich on administrative appeal, and subsequently denied their application for reconsideration. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decisions, finding no abuse of discretion in refusing new evidence or denying reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsInsurance Coverage DisputePolicy CancellationAdministrative ReviewEvidence SubmissionAppellate DivisionWCLJ DecisionBoard AffirmationReconsideration DenialAbuse of Discretion
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 24, 2003

Master-Built Construction Co. v. Thorne

This case involves an appeal by Master-Built Construction Co., Inc. (the contractor), from an order that granted summary judgment to Oakleigh B. Thorne (the plaintiff) in the sum of $574,033.86. The dispute arises from a "cost-plus" construction agreement where the contractor allegedly over-billed for costs associated with subcontracted workers, independent labor, and its own employees, and improperly billed for owned scaffolding equipment. The Supreme Court found the agreement unambiguously limited the contractor's ability to pass along costs to only those actually incurred and precluded billing for owned equipment. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, finding that Thorne made a prima facie showing of over-billing and improper billing by the contractor.

Breach of ContractUnjust EnrichmentSummary JudgmentConstruction AgreementCost-Plus ContractContract InterpretationOver-billingAppellate ReviewDutchess CountyAffirmed Decision
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Seybert v. International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots

Plaintiff John R. Seybert, a member of the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots (IOMM & P) union, filed a lawsuit alleging violations of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) and a breach of the duty of fair representation. Seybert contested his reclassification from Group A to Group B under a new union by-law, arguing it was a retroactive and punitive measure for his political activities. The union contended the rule was a reasonable method to allocate jobs to active seafarers. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant, determining that the reclassification was not an unlawful disciplinary action under the LMRDA and did not constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation. Additionally, the court granted summary judgment on the retroactivity claim, as the plaintiff offered no opposition.

Union DisputesLabor Management Reporting and Disclosure ActDuty of Fair RepresentationSummary JudgmentUnion By-lawsJob ClassificationHiring Hall RulesInternal Union PoliticsRetroactive ApplicationMember Reclassification
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Millennium Global Emerging Credit Master Fund Ltd.

This memorandum addresses a dispute between the Liquidators of two Bermuda-based investment funds (Master Fund and Feeder Fund) and BCP Securities LLC. The Liquidators sought to compel BCP to produce documents concerning the Funds' financial affairs and assets, following the U.S. Bankruptcy Court's recognition of the Bermuda liquidation proceedings under Chapter 15. BCP resisted discovery, arguing lack of nexus to U.S. property, the pending proceeding rule concerning a U.K. arbitration (to which BCP is not a party), and the Stored Communications Act. Additionally, BCP filed a separate motion to vacate the recognition order, despite having an appeal on the same matter pending in the District Court. The Court granted the Liquidators' motion to compel discovery, finding the requested documents directly relevant under 11 U.S.C. § 1521(a)(4), and dismissed BCP's motion to vacate for lack of jurisdiction due to the ongoing appeal.

BankruptcyChapter 15Foreign Main ProceedingForeign Nonmain ProceedingDiscoveryDocument ProductionRule 2004Stored Communications ActAppealJurisdiction
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

VCG Special Opportunities Master Fund Ltd. v. Citibank, N.A.

This action involves a credit default swap (CDS) transaction between Plaintiff VCG Special Opportunities Master Fund Limited and Defendant Citibank, N.A. VCG, as the protection seller, challenged Citibank's demands for additional collateral and its declaration of a "Floating Amount Event" related to an "Implied Writedown" on a reference obligation. Citibank counterclaimed for VCG's breach of contract. The court granted Citibank's motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding Citibank's actions proper and VCG's challenges, including claims for rescission and unjust enrichment, without merit. The court concluded that VCG waived its right to dispute the collateral demands by continuing to perform under the contract and failing to utilize the agreed-upon dispute resolution mechanism.

Credit Default SwapCollateralized Debt ObligationVariation MarginImplied WritedownFloating Amount EventBreach of ContractJudgment on PleadingsUnilateral MistakeGood Faith and Fair DealingUnjust Enrichment
References
25
Case No. ADJ2872928 (LBO 0355771) ADJ3784596 (LAO 0865396)
Regular
Aug 26, 2013

MARIA ROSALES vs. REPUBLIC MASTER CHEFS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, involving applicant Maria Rosales and defendants Republic Master Chefs/State Compensation Insurance Fund, resulted in the dismissal of the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge's Report and Recommendation. While the judge recommended denial, the Board's order is specifically to dismiss the petition. The dismissal was effective August 26, 2013.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationRepublic Master ChefsState Compensation Insurance FundMaria RosalesADJ2872928ADJ3784596
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith Ex Rel. New York Metro Area Postal Union v. Potter

Plaintiffs, including William M. Smith and the New York Metro Area Postal Union, sued John E. Potter, Post Master General of the United States (USPS), following anthrax contamination at the Morgan Processing and Distribution Center. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and New York State environmental laws due to the USPS's handling of the contamination and sought injunctive relief. The USPS moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, while the plaintiffs moved to compel inspection. The Court had previously denied a preliminary injunction, finding no imminent and substantial risk. In this decision, the Court ruled that the USPS's cleanup efforts constituted a removal action under CERCLA Section 104, and therefore, under CERCLA Section 113(h) and RCRA Section 6972(b)(2)(B)(ii), the federal court lacked jurisdiction to review challenges to ongoing CERCLA removal actions. Consequently, the Court granted the USPS's motion to dismiss the entire complaint and denied the plaintiffs' motion to compel inspection as moot.

Anthrax ContaminationCERCLA Removal ActionRCRA Citizen SuitSubject Matter JurisdictionMotion to DismissEnvironmental LawHazardous WastePreliminary InjunctionPostal FacilityJudicial Review Bar
References
19
Case No. 79-CV-53
Regular Panel Decision

Herman v. Davis Acoustical Corp.

This action stems from a civil contempt proceeding against the defendants for violating the overtime pay and record-keeping provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), originally enjoined by a 1979 Consent Judgment. A special master was appointed to investigate the alleged violations, determine employee status, calculate back wages, and address prejudgment interest and attorney's fees. The special master found a pattern of FLSA violations, concluded that individuals classified as 'independent contractors' were in fact 'employees' under the FLSA, and recommended a fine of $1,318,648.93, plus simple prejudgment interest. The court reviewed numerous objections from both the defendants and the plaintiff, ultimately upholding the special master's findings regarding the violations, employee classification, the admission of evidence, damages for unidentified employees, and the award of prejudgment interest. The court also affirmed the special master's refusal to compound interest daily or award attorney's fees to the plaintiff, and confirmed the authority to order payment schedules. Consequently, the court accepted the special master's report in its entirety and ordered the defendants to pay the specified fine and prejudgment interest.

FLSA violationsovertime payrecord-keeping violationscivil contemptspecial masterback wagesprejudgment interestindependent contractor statusemployee misclassificationcompensatory fines
References
23
Showing 1-10 of 119 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