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

IKEA U.S., Inc. v. Industrial Board of Appeals

This case concerns a petitioner who was found to have violated Labor Law § 191 (1) (a) for failing to pay weekly wages to manual workers. The initial determination by the Commissioner of Labor was confirmed by the Industrial Board of Appeals. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, had previously confirmed this determination and dismissed the petition. On appeal, the Appellate Division reviewed the proceeding, treating it as properly transferred. The Appellate Division found substantial evidence to support the determination that the petitioner employed manual workers and violated the Labor Law by using a bi-weekly payroll scheme instead of weekly payments. Consequently, the Appellate Division vacated the Supreme Court's judgment, confirmed the part of the determination finding the Labor Law violation, and dismissed the proceeding on the merits.

CPLR Article 78Labor Law ViolationWage PaymentManual WorkersBi-weekly PayrollSubstantial Evidence ReviewAppellate DivisionVacated JudgmentConfirmed DeterminationDismissed Petition
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. Lavine

In this Article 78 proceeding, the petitioner sought to vacate the determination of respondents denying her application for payment of certain babysitting expenses. The petitioner, a recipient of public assistance, incurred these expenses to attend her brother's funeral in an emergency situation. She attempted to secure prior approval from the Social Services Office but was unable to reach her caseworker or supervisor. Upon her return, her request for payment was denied on the procedural ground of failing to obtain prior approval. The court found this determination to be arbitrary and capricious given the emergency circumstances and the department's lack of a procedure for such situations. The court vacated the determination and remitted the matter for consideration on the merits.

babysitting expensespublic assistanceemergency servicesprior approvalsocial services regulationsarbitrary and capriciousfair hearingOnondaga Countytemporary absenceprocedural grounds
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 1993

Martin v. Board of Education

The petitioner, a permanent custodial worker, initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a February 25, 1993, determination by the Board of Education of the Yonkers City School District. This determination found him guilty of misconduct and dismissed him from his position. The court confirmed the Board's determination, dismissing the petitioner's proceeding on the merits. The court ruled that Civil Service Law § 50 (4) did not bar the Board from terminating the petitioner for material misrepresentations on his employment applications, as the Board, as the employer, could bring charges under Civil Service Law § 75. Additionally, a Yonkers City Court report detailing the petitioner's criminal history was deemed properly admitted, and the Board's determination was found to be supported by substantial evidence.

Article 78 ProceedingMisconductDismissal from EmploymentMaterial MisrepresentationEmployment Application FraudCivil Service LawAdministrative HearingSubstantial EvidenceAdmissibility of EvidenceCriminal History Report
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anderson v. New York State Urban Development Corp.

This case involves a judicial review of a determination by the New York State Urban Development Corporation (doing business as Empire State Development Corporation) to condemn real property. The petitioners challenged the determination on two grounds: first, that the respondent failed to make a specific finding regarding a feasible method for relocating displaced families as required by the UDC Act § 10(g); and second, that the respondent did not adequately consider the socioeconomic impact of displacement under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The court found no merit in the petitioners' contentions, concluding that the respondent did make the necessary finding for relocation, which was supported by the final environmental impact statement (FEIS). The court also determined that the respondent properly considered the project's socioeconomic impact on the community as a whole, satisfying SEQRA requirements. Consequently, the court confirmed the respondent's determination, denied the petition, and dismissed the proceeding.

Eminent DomainCondemnationEDPL 207SEQRARelocation PlanPublic UseEnvironmental ReviewUrban DevelopmentJudicial ReviewDisplaced Persons
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 03, 1974

Hunter v. Frank

A petitioner initiated a proceeding under CPLR article 78 to challenge a determination made by the Police Commissioner of Nassau County on January 3, 1974. The determination had found the petitioner guilty of specific charges and resulted in his dismissal from his position as a custodial worker within the Police Department. The court reviewed the determination and ultimately confirmed it, dismissing the proceeding on its merits. The court found that the Police Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence. Justices Martuscello, Latham, Margett, Brennan, and Shapiro concurred with the decision.

Custodial WorkerPolice DepartmentDismissalSubstantial EvidenceArticle 78 Proceeding
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kachele v. Shoreham-Wading River Central School District

This case concerns a CPLR article 78 proceeding initiated by a petitioner against the Shoreham-Wading River Central School District. The petitioner challenged the district's determination, dated March 6, 1995, which upheld findings of misconduct, insubordination, and incompetency, leading to her dismissal as a Custodial Worker I. The court reviewed the determination and found it to be supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, the court confirmed the determination and dismissed the proceeding on the merits, concluding that the penalty of dismissal was not disproportionate to the offenses committed.

CPLR Article 78Administrative ReviewPublic EmploymentDismissalMisconductInsubordinationIncompetencySubstantial EvidencePenalty ReviewSchool District
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Resnik v. New York State Division of Human Rights

This case involves a petitioner's review of a determination made by the Commissioner of the State Division of Human Rights. The original determination, dated January 30, 1992, concluded that Pall Biomedical Products Corp. had not unlawfully discriminated against the petitioner based on her pregnancy. The current proceeding confirmed this determination and dismissed the case on the merits. The court found substantial evidence in the record to support the Commissioner's finding, specifically noting the petitioner's misrepresentation of hours, refusal to assist co-workers, and irregular work hours.

human rightsemployment discriminationpregnancy discriminationadministrative reviewsubstantial evidenceemployee misconductirregular work hoursNew York State Division of Human Rights
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 1993

Sanchez v. Board of Education

The petitioner, a building custodian employed by the Yonkers Public Schools, challenged a determination by the Board of Education of the Yonkers City School District which found him guilty of misconduct and terminated his employment. The misconduct involved the petitioner's participation in the theft of food items from a school cafeteria, a fact he admitted to investigators and which was corroborated by other witnesses. Upon review, the court found that the Board's determination was supported by substantial evidence. Furthermore, the court concluded that the penalty of discharge was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness. Consequently, the determination was confirmed, and the proceeding was dismissed on the merits.

MisconductEmployment TerminationTheftSchool DistrictCustodial WorkerJudicial ReviewSubstantial EvidencePenalty ReviewDue ProcessPublic Schools
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 21, 1992

Saitanis Enterprises, Inc. v. Hines

The petitioner initiated a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to challenge a determination by the New York State Department of Labor. The Department of Labor's determination, dated January 21, 1992, found that the petitioner failed to pay prevailing wages and supplements to its employees in violation of Labor Law § 220. The court confirmed the Department of Labor's determination, finding that the record supported the finding of underpayment and that the calculation of underpayment was supported by substantial evidence. The court also deemed the petitioner's argument regarding worker classification as untimely, noting that challenges to prevailing wage rate schedules must be made within four months of receipt. Consequently, the proceeding was dismissed on the merits, with costs.

prevailing wagesunderpaymentDepartment of Laborcredibility determinationsworker classificationtimeliness of challengeadministrative agencysubstantial evidencelabor law violationjudicial review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 21, 1987

McCaffrey v. Board of Estimate

The petitioners challenged a determination by the Board of Estimate of the City of New York, dated January 22, 1987, which approved a site in Long Island City for a residential shelter for homeless men. The Supreme Court, Queens County, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed. The court found that the respondents complied with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), City Environmental Quality Review regulations, and the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP). The respondents had identified environmental concerns, taken a 'hard look,' and provided a 'reasoned elaboration' for their determination. The petitioners' argument that ULURP procedures needed to be redone due to an expired lease option was deemed without merit.

Environmental ReviewHomeless ShelterSite ApprovalLand UseCPLR Article 78SEQRAULURPGovernment DecisionAppellate CourtProcedural Compliance
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 10,592 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