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

New York State Public Employment Relations Board v. Board of Education

The concurring opinion, authored by Judge Fuchsberg, affirms the ultimate disposition of the case, upholding the Public Employment Relations Board's (PERB) order. The opinion delves into the critical distinction between an administrative agency exceeding its jurisdiction and merely committing an error of law. It argues that an order issued without statutory power or in excess thereof is inherently void and subject to collateral attack, even if statutory time limits for direct review have passed. Judge Fuchsberg supports this jurisdictional argument by referencing several prior cases, including *Matter of Foy v Schechter* and *Matter of Guardian Life Ins. Co. v Bohlinger*. Ultimately, the opinion concludes that the PERB's remedial orders were fully authorized due to a specific statutory violation, despite the complex jurisdictional challenges raised.

Public Employment Relations BoardAdministrative LawJurisdictionCollateral AttackStatutory InterpretationError of LawBack PayCivil Service LawArticle 78PERB
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2006

Lawrence Teachers Ass'n v. Lawrence Public Schools

This case concerns an appeal by the Lawrence Teachers Association (petitioner) challenging the denial of their petition to confirm an arbitration award. The arbitration award mandated Lawrence Public Schools (respondent) to designate members of the petitioner’s bargaining unit to provide special education services outside the school district's geographical boundaries. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, denied the petition, concluding the award was unenforceable. The appellate court affirmed this decision, ruling that the arbitration award violated public policy as it contravened Education Law former § 3602-c (2). This statute required the school district to contract with the school district where the nonpublic school attended by the pupil was located for such services. The court emphasized that an arbitrator's award cannot stand if it is contrary to well-defined statutory law and public policy.

Arbitration AwardPublic PolicyEducation LawSpecial Education ServicesCollective BargainingStipulationStatutory ViolationAppellate ReviewSchool District ObligationsLabor Dispute
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

The Communications Workers of America/Graduate Employees Union (CWA) petitioned the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to be certified as the bargaining representative for graduate and teaching assistants at State University of New York (SUNY) campuses. Initially, PERB's Director dismissed the petition, concluding that these assistants were not 'public employees' under the Taylor Law, applying a balancing test. PERB subsequently rejected this balancing test, establishing a new standard focused on the existence of a regular and substantial employment relationship not explicitly excluded by the Legislature. Under this new standard, PERB reversed the Director's decision, determining that graduate and teaching assistants are covered employees and constitute an appropriate bargaining unit. SUNY then initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to annul PERB's determination, arguing legal error in PERB's adopted test and that collective bargaining for academic issues violated public policy. The court upheld PERB's interpretation as reasonable and legally permissible, affirming PERB's determination and dismissing SUNY's petition.

Collective BargainingPublic EmployeesTaylor LawGraduate AssistantsTeaching AssistantsPublic Employment Relations BoardPERBCivil Service LawEmployment RelationshipPublic Policy
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Incorporated Village of Valley Stream v. State of New York Public Service Commission

The Village of Valley Stream initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the Public Service Commission's (PSC) determination upholding Long Island Lighting Company's (LILCO) decision to terminate street lighting service. LILCO, citing abnormal expenditures due to cable failure and wear and tear, refused to replace the system and ceased service. The PSC interpreted LILCO's tariff to allow termination under such circumstances, a decision the court found rational. The court balanced LILCO's significant economic loss against minimal public harm, considering viable alternatives for the village and new legal requirements for public bids and prevailing wages, ultimately confirming the PSC's determination and dismissing the village's petition.

Street Lighting ServiceUtility TerminationPublic Service Commission ReviewTariff InterpretationAbnormal ExpenditureEconomic LossPublic InterestCPLR Article 78Utility RegulationCable Failure
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Verizon New York Inc. v. New York State Public Service Commission

Verizon New York Inc. commenced a special proceeding against the New York State Public Service Commission and other respondents. Verizon sought to overturn a determination allowing public disclosure of certain documents, which Verizon claimed were trade secrets or confidential commercial information, under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). The documents in question related to Verizon's network costs and its methods and procedures for its wireless service, Verizon Voice Link (WL). The court reviewed the Secretary's and RAO's determinations, which found some information to be trade secrets but still required a showing of 'substantial injury' for exemption. The court ruled that once information is deemed a trade secret under Public Officers Law § 87 (2) (d), no further showing of substantial competitive injury is required for exemption. Consequently, the court granted in part the petition, exempting specific cost information and several M&P documents from disclosure, while denying exemption for three M&P documents.

FOIL ExemptionTrade Secret ProtectionConfidential Commercial InformationPublic Officers Law § 87 (2) (d)Substantial Competitive InjuryStatutory InterpretationAdministrative Determination ReviewCPLR Article 78Wireless ServicesCost Information Disclosure
References
47
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 1978

Town of Huntington v. Public Employment Relations Board

This proceeding, pursuant to CPLR article 78, reviews a determination by the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) dated March 29, 1978. PERB had certified Local 342, Long Island Public Service Employees as the representative for a unit of workers employed by the Town of Huntington. The court confirmed the determination and dismissed the proceeding on the merits. The decision noted that substantial evidence supported PERB's designation of a negotiating unit for 53 blue-collar employees and the senior beach manager. The court found a rational basis for PERB's determination, reflecting careful consideration of appropriate factors.

Public EmploymentCollective BargainingEmployee RepresentationLabor RelationsPERBNegotiating UnitBlue-collar employeesJudicial ReviewAdministrative LawGovernment Employees
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Civil Service Employees Ass'n v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

The Civil Service Employees Association (C.S.E.A.) filed an Article 78 application to challenge actions taken by the City of White Plains and the Public Employment Relations Board (P.E.R.B.). C.S.E.A. sought to vacate a resolution where the City recognized a different employee organization (S.I.W.A.) for a portion of its employees, thereby altering C.S.E.A.'s bargaining unit, and to annul a P.E.R.B. order upholding the City's action. The City cross-moved to dismiss the petition, arguing improper venue and that it was not a proper party. The court determined that Albany County was the correct venue and that the City was a proper party. The central issue was whether the City could unilaterally change bargaining unit composition without C.S.E.A.'s consent or a decertification petition. The court ultimately denied C.S.E.A.'s requested relief, agreeing with P.E.R.B. that public employers can recognize different employee organizations once an incumbent's unchallenged representation status period expires, in accordance with Civil Service Law sections 204 and 208.

Public Employment RelationsCollective Bargaining UnitsEmployee Organization RecognitionTaylor LawCivil Service LawArticle 78 CPLRBargaining Unit AlterationDecertification ProceedingsPublic Employer RightsVenue Disputes
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York Public Interest Research Group Straphangers Campaign, Inc. v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) faced a significant budget deficit and implemented fare/toll increases and token booth closures. Public interest groups challenged these decisions, alleging that the MTA's public hearing notices were misleading and incomplete regarding financial details and alternative solutions. Lower courts initially sided with the petitioners, vacating the MTA's actions. However, on appeal, the court reversed these rulings, asserting that the MTA's notices complied with statutory requirements and were neither false nor misleading. The court emphasized the legislative role in setting disclosure standards and affirmed the MTA's authority, especially concerning the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority's toll-fixing powers. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed, upholding the MTA's original decisions.

Public TransportationFare IncreaseToll IncreaseBudget DeficitPublic HearingsStatutory ComplianceJudicial ReviewAdministrative LawPublic Authorities LawCPLR Article 78
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

County of Westchester v. Arfmann

The case concerns public employees of the Westchester County Department of Public Welfare who engaged in a strike starting March 1, 1967, resulting in a motion for a temporary injunction by the County of Westchester. The employees, including the Westchester Welfare Workers Association, picketed county offices due to reported issues like case overloads and poor working conditions. While defendants claimed illness and presented testimony from a psychiatrist regarding 'adult situational stress reactions,' the court found that the mass absence constituted a strike interfering with welfare services. The court ruled that Section 807 of the Labor Law, which forbids injunctions in labor disputes, does not apply to public employees. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for a temporary injunction.

Public Sector StrikeTemporary InjunctionLabor DisputeCivil Service LawEmployee ProtestWestchester CountyWelfare DepartmentIllegal StrikePicket LinesGovernment Employees
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kessel v. Public Service Commission

This case involves an appeal challenging a rate increase granted to the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) by the Public Service Commission. LILCO had requested the increase due to severe financial difficulties and the anticipated non-operation of its Shoreham nuclear plant, leading to a "Financial Stability Adjustment" (FSA) to improve cash flow without increasing income. Petitioners initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, asserting that the Commission failed to exercise proper discretion, did not adequately consider ratepayers' interests, and improperly shifted the burden of proof. The court affirmed the Commission's decision, finding that it had appropriately balanced the interests of consumers and investors to preserve LILCO's financial integrity and ensure reliable service. The court also dismissed allegations regarding the burden of proof and judicial bias, concluding that the Commission's determinations were rational and supported by the record.

Rate IncreasePublic Service CommissionLong Island Lighting Company (LILCO)Financial Stability Adjustment (FSA)Utility RegulationAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewUtility RatesShoreham Nuclear PlantBurden of Proof
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,498 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