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

Tummino v. Hamburg

Concerned Women for America, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, and Christian Pharmacists Fellowship International (intervenors) sought to intervene in a case to appeal a judgment that ordered the FDA to allow Plan B to be marketed over-the-counter to 17-year-olds. They also requested an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The District Court denied their motions, finding that the intervenors lacked standing to intervene due to their failure to demonstrate a concrete injury-in-fact regarding informational, procedural, or pharmacists' alleged harms, and could not establish third-party standing. Furthermore, the court ruled that the motion to intervene was untimely, as the intervenors knew of their interest well before filing their motion. Finally, the motion for an extension of time to appeal was also denied, as the intervenors did not establish "excusable neglect or good cause" for their delay in filing, with their reason of difficulty finding local counsel being deemed insufficient.

InterventionStandingTimelinessAppealEmergency ContraceptivesPlan BFDAPharmaceutical RegulationJudicial ReviewAdministrative Procedure Act
References
56
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anani v. CVS RX SERVICES, INC.

Salah Anani, a former pharmacist, sued CVS RX Services, Inc. alleging unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law. Anani, classified as a bi-weekly salaried pharmacist, received a base salary and additional premium pay for hours exceeding 44 per week. He contended he was misclassified as exempt and was entitled to time-and-a-half overtime. CVS argued Anani was properly exempt under the FLSA's professional and highly compensated employee provisions. The court determined Anani met the 'learned professional' duties test and the central issue was the salary basis test. The court concluded that Anani's compensation scheme, which included a guaranteed base salary and premium pay for additional hours, adhered to FLSA salary basis requirements and associated regulations. Consequently, the court granted CVS's motion for summary judgment, thereby dismissing Anani's complaint.

FLSA exemptionOvertime compensationSalary basis testHighly compensated employee exemptionPharmacist exemptionProfessional employeeSummary judgmentNew York Labor LawPremium payWage and hour
References
42
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 03222 [228 AD3d 1122]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 13, 2024

Matter of So v. Erin's Pharm. Inc.

Claimant Aesoon So filed for workers' compensation benefits for her deceased husband, a supervising pharmacist, who allegedly contracted COVID-19 during his employment. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) disallowed the claims due to insufficient evidence of a causal connection between employment and COVID-19 contraction. Claimant's counsel filed an application for review with the Workers' Compensation Board using an outdated form, leading the Board to deny the review. The Appellate Division reversed the Board's decision, finding that the Board abused its discretion by denying review based on the minor form discrepancy, which caused no prejudice, and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationCOVID-19 ClaimApplication for ReviewBoard DiscretionOutdated FormProcedural ErrorCausal ConnectionAppellate ReviewAdministrative LawClaim Disallowance
References
8
Case No. 525363
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2018

Matter of Park v. Corizon Health Inc.

Claimant Byoung Park, a pharmacist, was exposed to pepper spray at work in 2014, leading to various symptoms. She filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits, and a WCLJ initially established the case for posttraumatic stress disorder and depression, later amending it to include exacerbation of preexisting fibromyalgia. The Workers' Compensation Board subsequently reversed the decision regarding fibromyalgia, finding no causal relationship between the pepper spray exposure and the exacerbation. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that the claimant failed to establish a causal connection, noting conflicting medical testimony and the equivocal nature of some expert opinions.

Workers' CompensationFibromyalgiaPepper Spray ExposureCausal RelationshipMedical TestimonyAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidencePreexisting ConditionWorkers' Compensation BoardExpert Witness
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Garrity v. University at Albany

Petitioner, a probationary supervising pharmacist at the University at Albany, was terminated shortly after reporting pharmacy deficiencies to both internal and external authorities. Alleging retaliatory discharge, he initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, claiming violations of his whistleblower rights under Civil Service Law § 75-b and First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition without a hearing. This appellate court modified the judgment, finding sufficient factual disputes to warrant a hearing on the bad faith and First Amendment claims, but upheld the dismissal of the Civil Service Law § 75-b claim due to the petitioner's failure to allow his superiors reasonable time to address the issues before reporting externally. The case was remitted to the Supreme Court for further proceedings.

Whistleblower ProtectionRetaliatory TerminationProbationary EmploymentFirst Amendment RightsCPLR Article 78InsubordinationAdministrative LawPublic EmployeePharmacistUniversity Administration
References
11
Showing 1-5 of 5 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