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

Seale v. Madison Cnty

Plaintiffs Kelly Seale and David Seale filed an employment discrimination action against Madison County and five individual defendants, alleging violations under Title VII, NYHRL, and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985. Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings and to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court dismissed David Seale's Title VII claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and granted dismissal for most other claims not specifically outlined. However, Kelly Seale's hostile work environment claims (under Title VII, NYHRL against the County, and § 1983 against Episcopo), her retaliation claims (under Title VII against the County, and NYHRL against County, Riley, Episcopo, Aylward), and her First Amendment retaliation claims (against County, Riley, Episcopo, Aylward) survived. David Seale's First Amendment retaliation claim also survived against County, Riley, Bailey, Episcopo, and Aylward. Defendant Cary was terminated as a party.

Employment DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliation ClaimsSexual HarassmentTitle VIINew York Human Rights Law42 U.S.C. § 1983First AmendmentEqual ProtectionJudgment on Pleadings
References
109
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 06204
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2016

Seales v. Trident Structural Corp.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, reviewed appeals and cross-appeals from two Supreme Court orders regarding summary judgment motions in a personal injury action. Plaintiff, Seonn Seales, was injured by falling sheetrock while installing a sprinkler system. The court affirmed the denial of plaintiff's Labor Law § 240(1) motion, finding the sheetrock was not being hoisted or secured. It modified the Supreme Court orders, granting summary judgment to the owners on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 200, and common-law negligence claims, but denied summary judgment to the contractor, Trident Structural Corp., on Labor Law §§ 241(6), 200, and common-law negligence, citing triable issues of fact regarding its agency status and creation of the dangerous condition. The court also found unresolved issues of fact concerning contractual and common-law indemnification claims between the owners and Trident.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentFalling ObjectSummary JudgmentLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Labor Law § 200Common-Law NegligenceIndemnificationAppellate Review
References
25
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00195 [179 AD3d 1262]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2020

Matter of Seales v. Eastern Concrete Cutting Corp.

Kevan Seales filed a workers' compensation claim for an occupational disease. The claim was established, and a lump-sum award of $189,790.16 was stipulated. Claimant's counsel, Geoffrey Schotter, applied for a fee of $28,500, which was reduced to $20,000 by the Workers' Compensation Board. Schotter appealed this reduction. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the Board has broad discretion in approving counsel fees and did not abuse its discretion by reducing the fee, as it considered all appropriate factors.

Workers' CompensationCounsel FeesOccupational DiseaseSchedule Loss of UseLump-Sum AwardBoard DiscretionAppellate ReviewAttorney FeesRepetitive Strain InjuryJudicial Review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of 360networks (USA) Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission of California (In Re 360networks (USA) Inc.)

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of 360networks (USA) Inc. (Debtors) initiated an adversary proceeding against the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California (CPUC) seeking to avoid certain fee payments as preferential transfers under the Bankruptcy Code. The CPUC moved to dismiss the action, asserting Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and arguing the court lacked jurisdiction. Judge Allan L. Gropper denied the CPUC's motion, concluding that the court holds in rem jurisdiction over the debtor's property in a preference action. The Court determined that the exercise of this jurisdiction would not offend state sovereignty, citing various forms of potential relief available, including the disallowance of claims by other California state instrumentalities.

Bankruptcy LawSovereign ImmunityEleventh AmendmentIn Rem JurisdictionPreference ActionMotion to DismissPublic Utilities CommissionCalifornia Environmental Quality ActDebtor-Creditor RelationsFederal Jurisdiction
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 23, 2011

Seals v. Potter

Keisha Seals, a former USPS employee, sued Postmaster General John E. Potter and other USPS managers for hostile work environment, race discrimination, and retaliation under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981a, along with state law claims. Seals alleged racial discrimination and a hostile environment, including closer scrutiny, denial of vacation, and racist comments, leading to her termination. Defendants moved for dismissal or summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment for the defendants on all non-Title VII claims and dismissed all defendants except Potter. The court denied summary judgment for the Title VII claims against Potter, ruling that Seals had sufficiently exhausted administrative remedies, despite a six-month delay in returning an EEO counseling packet, as the underlying purpose of the exhaustion requirement was served.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VIIRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary JudgmentAdministrative ExhaustionFederal EmploymentUSPSEEO Process
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of LTV Aerospace and Defense Co. v. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of LTV Steel Co. (In re Chateaugay Corp.)

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of LTV Aerospace and Defense Company (Aerospace Committee) appealed a Bankruptcy Court's November 5, 1991, order that authorized LTV Steel to make payments to the J & L Hourly Pension Plan. The Aerospace Committee claimed standing based on the potential consolidation of LTV estates, a prospective claim for contribution against LTV Steel, and the effect on their cash distributions. The District Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the Aerospace Committee lacked standing. The court found their asserted interests too indirect and speculative, emphasizing that a party must be directly and adversely affected pecuniarily by a bankruptcy order to have standing for appeal.

Bankruptcy AppealStanding DoctrinePecuniary InterestCreditors' RightsPension Benefit Guaranty CorporationERISAChapter 11 BankruptcyCorporate ReorganizationJoint and Several LiabilityControlled Group
References
27
Case No. 91 Civ. 8373 (DNE)
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 07, 1992

In Re Chateaugay Corp.

This case involves an appeal by the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of LTV Aerospace and Defense Company (Aerospace Committee) from a Bankruptcy Court order. The order authorized LTV Steel Company, Inc. to make payments to a pension plan. The LTV Corporation and its affiliates had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1986, with cases procedurally but not substantively consolidated. The Aerospace Committee claimed standing to appeal, arguing potential impact from a future unitary reorganization plan, a claim for contribution, and effects on cash distributions. The District Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Aerospace Committee lacked standing because its pecuniary interests were not directly and adversely affected, and its arguments were speculative.

Bankruptcy AppealStandingPecuniary InterestUnsecured Creditors CommitteePension Plan FundingERISAControlled Group LiabilityChapter 11 ProceedingsProcedural ConsolidationSubstantive Consolidation
References
29
Case No. ADJ9437719
Regular
Jul 03, 2018

MARIA RODRIGUEZ vs. BODEGA LATINA CORPORATION dba EL SUPER, YORK RISK SERIVCES, SAFETY NATIONAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board is issuing an order to correct a clerical error in its June 20, 2018 decision. The prior decision, which denied a petition for reconsideration in the case of Maria Rodriguez v. Bodega Latina Corporation, failed to include the official seal of the Appeals Board. This correction is being made without granting reconsideration, as clerical errors can be rectified at any time. The corrected order will now properly include the Appeals Board's seal.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDBODEGA LATINA CORPORATIONEL SUPERYORK RISK SERIVCESSAFETY NATIONALADJ9437719OPINION AND ORDER CORRECTING CLERICAL ERRORclerical errorseal of the Appeals BoardReconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hill v. Reynolds

This case concerns an appeal where the Supreme Court, New York County, initially granted Union officials a preliminary injunction against the City University of New York's employee layoffs, in aid of arbitration, and denied the respondents' motion to dismiss. The Union contended these layoffs violated a collective bargaining agreement mandating minimum staffing levels. However, the appellate court unanimously reversed this decision. It ruled that the Union lacked standing to contest alleged harm to the University community or students, as it did not demonstrate a specific injury. Furthermore, the appellate court determined that a preliminary injunction under CPLR 7502 (c) was unwarranted because the Union failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, given that reinstatement and back pay would be available if they prevailed in the underlying arbitration.

ArbitrationPreliminary InjunctionStandingLayoffsCollective Bargaining AgreementBudgetary RestraintsIrreparable HarmCPLR 7502(c)Union RightsJudicial Review
References
7
Case No. 08-cv-3546 (ADS)(WDW)
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2011

Smith v. TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD DEPT. OF SANITATION

This civil rights case was brought by three African-American employees, Leo Smith, Jr., Benjamin Cannon, Jr., and John Christopher Smith, against the Town of Hempstead Department of Sanitation Sanitary District No. 2 and several individual defendants. Plaintiffs alleged a hostile work environment based on a noose incident and subsequent retaliation for filing EEOC complaints. The defendants moved for summary judgment. The Court denied summary judgment on the hostile work environment claims against the Sanitary District, Robert Noble, Michael McDermott, and Nicholas Dionisio, citing triable issues of fact regarding the severity of the environment and the adequacy of the employer's remedial actions. However, summary judgment was granted for defendant John Beyer and the Board of Commissioners on these claims. Retaliation claims by John Smith and Benjamin Cannon were dismissed, but Leo Smith's retaliation claim against Michael McDermott and the Sanitary District was allowed to proceed. All claims of conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 were dismissed due to lack of evidence of agreement and the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine.

Hostile Work EnvironmentRacial DiscriminationRetaliationSummary JudgmentCivil RightsTitle VIISection 1981Section 1983New York State Human Rights LawIntracorporate Conspiracy Doctrine
References
43
Showing 1-10 of 527 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