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

In re the Estate of Toribio

The case involves an uncontested proceeding for an administrator to resign and for a successor to be appointed. The initial administrator, Jennifer, wishes to resign from her role in the estate of her three-year-old sister, Jannin, who died tragically. She requests the court appoint their father, Domingo Toribio, as the new administrator. The primary legal question addressed by Surrogate Kristin Booth Glen is whether Mr. Toribio, who only speaks, reads, and writes in Spanish, is qualified to serve as a fiduciary under SCPA 707 (2), which allows a court discretion to declare a person unable to read and write English ineligible. The court examines the legislative intent, relevant case law, and societal changes regarding disability and non-English-speaking populations, particularly in New York City. The opinion concludes that English language competence should not be a prerequisite for fiduciary status unless no reasonable accommodations are possible, and grants the application for Jennifer's resignation and Domingo Toribio's appointment, noting he and his counsel have established satisfactory communication.

Estate AdministrationSurrogate's CourtFiduciary AppointmentLanguage BarrierEnglish ProficiencySCPA 707 (2)Multilingual SocietyJudicial DiscretionCivil RightsAccess to Justice
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Grogan v. Holland Patent Central School District

Petitioner, a food service worker, resigned from Holland Patent Central School District and later sought to withdraw her resignation. The Board of Education refused, leading the petitioner to commence a CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging this refusal. The Supreme Court denied the relief sought, and the judgment was unanimously affirmed on appeal. The court found that delivery of the resignation to the Board's Clerk constituted valid delivery to the Board, and subsequently, the resignation could not be withdrawn without the Board's consent. The decision not to consent by the Board was deemed to have a reasonable basis. Claims of harassment and constructive discharge, preceding the resignation, were properly referred to the Public Employment Relations Board.

ResignationPublic EmploymentSchool DistrictEmployee RightsWithdrawal of ResignationJudicial ReviewAdministrative DecisionCivil ServiceEmployer-Employee DisputeArticle 78 Proceeding
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Hulin

Claimant, a data processing supervisor, was asked to resign by her executive director following complaints. The executive director suggested she consider resigning, but the claimant testified she was explicitly told she "must resign" and had "no choice." The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found the claimant eligible for unemployment insurance benefits, a decision which the employer appealed. The Board resolved a credibility issue in the claimant's favor, concluding that she was asked to resign immediately and did not voluntarily leave her employment without good cause. The decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was affirmed.

unemployment insurancevoluntary resignationgood causeconstructive dischargecredibility determinationappealsupervisoremployee complaintsexecutive directorunemployment benefits
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Civil Service Employees Ass'n v. Baldwin Union Free School District

Francesco Pignataro, a custodian, and his union, Civil Service Employees Association, filed an Article 78 petition challenging the Baldwin Union Free School District's refusal to reinstate him after he attempted to rescind a resignation letter and settlement agreement. The agreement, signed in July 2009, stipulated Pignataro's resignation and a $50,000 payment, contingent on Board approval on August 12, 2009. Prior to Board approval, Pignataro sought to withdraw his resignation and repudiate the settlement, but the Board proceeded with approval and refused his withdrawal. The court determined the settlement was a binding and enforceable contract, and Pignataro had no right to unilaterally rescind his resignation under its terms. Consequently, finding no fraud or overreaching and the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act inapplicable, the court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ResignationSettlement AgreementContract EnforcementUnilateral RescissionCollective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)Article 78 PetitionDue ProcessOlder Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)Grievance Arbitration
References
11
Case No. ADJ7298811
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

JONATHAN WYCINSKY vs. CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted by YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: Applicant, a police officer, sustained an industrial shoulder injury and was initially paid full salary under Labor Code § 4850. He later voluntarily resigned for financial reasons unrelated to his injury to accept a position with another city. The Board found that a voluntary, non-medical resignation terminates the employment relationship required for a § 4850 leave of absence. Therefore, the defendant is not liable for continued full salary payments post-resignation, despite the applicant remaining employed as a police officer elsewhere.

Labor Code section 4850police officervoluntary resignationnonmedical reasonsleave of absencefull salarytemporary disabilityindustrial injurytermination of employmentCity of Citrus Heights
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Hambly v. Big V Supermarkets

The claimant suffered a compensable back injury in September 1992 and received workers' compensation benefits until November 1992 when she returned to work. She resigned in May 1994 after being demoted for excessive absences. The Workers’ Compensation Board denied her application for reduced earnings benefits, finding that her resignation was for reasons unrelated to her back injury. Although a causally related partial disability was undisputed, there was no substantial evidence that it caused her reduced earnings. The record indicated her resignation was due to demotion, partly caused by absences from other physical ailments. The decision to deny benefits was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsReduced EarningsPartial DisabilityResignationDemotionExcessive AbsencesCausationSubstantial EvidenceAppellate AffirmationBack Injury
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 09, 1957

In re the Arbitration between Sarle & Sperry Gyroscope Co. Division of Sperry Rand Corp.

The petitioner, Local 450, moved to stay arbitration regarding the discharge and involuntary resignation of two employees, Crisci and Iacolino. The employees claimed they were coerced into resigning following an investigation into gambling activities at the respondent company's plant. They alleged duress, lack of union representation, and sought reinstatement with back pay. The court considered whether a resignation induced under unlawful coercion constitutes an arbitrable dispute under the collective bargaining agreement. Therefore, the court denied the motion to stay arbitration, allowing the dispute to proceed to arbitration, and adhered to its original decision after a motion for reargument.

ArbitrationStay ArbitrationInvoluntary ResignationUnjust DischargeCollective Bargaining AgreementUnion RepresentationDuressGrievanceReinstatementBack Pay
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 1994

In re the Claim of Scalfani

The claimant, employed as a registrar in a hospital preadmission testing unit, voluntarily resigned from her position. Her resignation was prompted by significant personal challenges, including marital problems, difficulties securing reliable child care, and the denial of a requested day off without conditions. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that the claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits, concluding that she had left her employment without good cause. This determination was made on the basis that her reasons for resigning were considered noncompelling. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that it was supported by substantial evidence.

Unemployment InsuranceVoluntary ResignationGood CauseChild CarePersonal ProblemsAppeal BoardAffirmed DecisionEmployee BenefitsWork-Life BalanceEmployment Law
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Martinez v. State University

Petitioner, a probationary employee, resigned after being notified of a demotion, but his subsequent request to withdraw the resignation was denied. He initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge this denial and other employment actions, which the Supreme Court dismissed. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the judgment, finding that the petitioner had stated a sufficient cause of action regarding the arbitrary and capricious denial of his resignation withdrawal, thus reversing the dismissal of those claims. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of claims challenging the termination of his probationary promotion and claims under Labor Law and Executive Law, citing insufficient factual allegations or lack of subject matter jurisdiction for the latter.

Resignation WithdrawalProbationary EmploymentCPLR Article 78Abuse of DiscretionArbitrary and CapriciousConstructive DischargeLabor LawPublic Employment Relations Board JurisdictionCivil Service LawExecutive Law
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Gerard

The claimant appealed a decision from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which denied her unemployment insurance benefits on the grounds of voluntarily leaving her employment without good cause. The claimant initially worked for a District Attorney’s office, then transferred to Battered Women’s Services, and subsequently resigned after failing to secure a desired position in the police department. She contended her resignation was due to the employer's failure to accommodate a medical disability. However, the court found that her testimony and evidence indicated she resigned due to dissatisfaction with promotional opportunities and difficulties with coworkers, which are not considered good cause for leaving employment. Consequently, the Board's decision to deny benefits was affirmed.

Unemployment benefitsVoluntary separationGood cause for leaving employmentCoworker disputePromotional opportunitiesMedical disability claimCredibility issueAppealAffirmed decision
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 152 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