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
Oct 21, 1997

Lehmuller v. Incorporated Village of Sag Harbor

Laura R. Lehmuller, a female police officer, sued the Incorporated Village of Sag Harbor alleging discrimination based on gender, pregnancy, and disability, and retaliation for filing an EEOC claim, under Title VII, ADA, and Section 1983. The Court previously dismissed her ADA and Section 1983 claims via summary judgment. Lehmuller moved for reconsideration of the Section 1983 claim dismissal, arguing her EEOC complaint was a matter of public concern and her right-to-petition rights were distinct. The Court granted reconsideration, finding material issues of fact regarding whether her speech was a matter of public concern and the Village's motive in directing her back to work. Consequently, the Court vacated the original summary judgment for the Village on the Section 1983 claim, denying both parties' summary judgment motions on that particular cause of action. Her request for certification to the Second Circuit was denied.

DiscriminationPregnancy DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationRetaliationFirst Amendment RightsSection 1983 ClaimEEOC ComplaintSummary Judgment MotionMotion for ReconsiderationPublic Employee Rights
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 21, 2014

Kohutka v. Town of Hempstead

Plaintiff Theresa Kohutka sued the Town of Hempstead and several individual defendants for hostile work environment based on gender and political affiliation, and First Amendment retaliation. The claims were brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), and the Nassau County Human Rights Law (NCHRL). Defendants moved for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint. The Court granted summary judgment in part, dismissing Section 1983 claims against individual defendants, all NCHRL claims, and some NYSHRL claims. However, the Court denied summary judgment in part, finding triable issues of fact for Section 1983 First Amendment Retaliation claims against the Town, Section 1983 Equal Protection Hostile Work Environment claims against the Town and Milone, and NYSHRL claims against the Town, Milone, Allback, and Reeke.

First Amendment RetaliationEqual Protection ClauseHostile Work EnvironmentGender DiscriminationPolitical Affiliation DiscriminationSummary Judgment42 U.S.C. Section 1983NYSHRL ClaimsMunicipal LiabilityMonell Doctrine
References
104
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Eldridge v. Rochester City School District

Plaintiff Teresa Eldridge filed a Title VII action against the Rochester City School District, alleging disparate treatment. She sought to amend her complaint to add Thomas Pappa as a defendant, introduce Section 1983 discrimination and retaliation claims, a Monell claim, and seek punitive damages. The court granted her motion in part, allowing the Section 1983 retaliation claim against Pappa and the request for punitive damages as a remedy against him, and the Monell claim against the District. However, the court denied the Section 1983 discrimination claim as futile due to a lack of an adverse employment action and rejected Title VII and Monell claims against Pappa. The decision emphasized judicial discretion in allowing amendments, despite procedural irregularities by the plaintiff's counsel.

Title VIICivil RightsSection 1983Employment DiscriminationWorkplace RetaliationMotion to Amend ComplaintFutility DoctrineAdverse Employment ActionMunicipal LiabilityMonell Claim
References
76
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cortes v. City of New York

Plaintiff Frankie Cortes, a former Corrections Officer with the New York City Department of Correction, filed an action alleging retaliation and discrimination based on gender and race under Title VII, Sections 1981, 1983, 1985, and New York state and city human rights laws. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety. The Court dismissed Title VII claims against individual defendants and sex discrimination-based Section 1981 claims with prejudice. The Section 1985 conspiracy claim was dismissed with leave to replead. However, the Court denied the motion to dismiss retaliation and racial discrimination claims under Section 1981, as well as First Amendment retaliation and Equal Protection claims under Section 1983. Motions to dismiss based on statute of limitations and exhaustion of remedies for Title VII hostile work environment and SHRL/CHRL claims were also denied, without prejudice to renewal at a later stage.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationGender DiscriminationRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentTitle VIISection 1981Section 1983First AmendmentFourteenth Amendment
References
48
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2012

James v. Countrywide Financial Corp.

Plaintiff Joseph C. James, an African-American male, commenced this action against Countrywide Financial Corp. and individual supervisors, alleging employment discrimination and retaliation based on race in violation of Title VII, Section 1981, Section 1983, NYHRL, FLSA, and NYLL. He claimed disparate treatment including demotion, unequal compensation, lack of management support, and sabotage of recruiting efforts. Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint. The court granted in part and denied in part the motion. It dismissed Title VII retaliation and hostile work environment claims, NYHRL claims, Section 1983, FLSA, NYLL, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment claims. Certain Title VII discrimination claims and specific Section 1981 discrimination and retaliation claims were allowed to proceed.

Employment DiscriminationRacial DiscriminationRetaliationTitle VIISection 1981Motion to DismissUnequal PayHostile Work EnvironmentDemotionFair Labor Standards Act
References
150
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anderson v. County of Nassau

Pro se plaintiff Joel Anderson filed an amended complaint alleging false arrest, unlawful imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process against Nassau County, the City of Long Beach, and Detective Shaun Dowling under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law. Defendants moved to dismiss all claims under Rule 12(b)(6). The Court granted Nassau County's motion to dismiss false arrest and unlawful imprisonment claims. All Section 1983 malicious prosecution claims and all abuse of process claims against all defendants were dismissed. The remaining claims are false arrest and unlawful imprisonment under Section 1983 and New York law against the City of Long Beach and Detective Dowling, and a New York law claim for malicious prosecution against the City of Long Beach.

Civil RightsFourth AmendmentRule 12(b)(6)False ArrestUnlawful ImprisonmentMalicious ProsecutionAbuse of ProcessMunicipal LiabilityProbable CausePro Se Litigation
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Snead v. DEPARTMENT OF SOC. SERV. OF CITY OF NY

Circuit Judge Mulligan concurs with the ultimate outcome of the case but fundamentally disagrees with the majority's reasoning regarding jurisdiction. He argues that jurisdiction under section 1331 for Fourteenth Amendment violations against municipalities is inappropriate, citing Congress's exclusion of municipalities from section 1983 liability. Judge Mulligan distinguishes the precedent set in Bivens, noting special factors counselling hesitation in this case, such as the fiscal vulnerability of municipalities and explicit congressional limitations in section 1983. Instead, he advocates for exercising pendent jurisdiction over the plaintiff's state cause of action for back wages, emphasizing judicial economy and the plaintiff's hardship. He dismisses the argument of res judicata, clarifying that a previous New York dismissal was due to a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, not a judgment on the merits. Thus, he concludes that the claim for back wages should be determined.

Fourteenth AmendmentSection 1983Section 1331Pendent JurisdictionMunicipal LiabilityCivil Rights Act of 1871Back WagesImproper DismissalRes JudicataExhaustion of Administrative Remedies
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thorsen v. County of Nassau

George Thorsen initiated an action in 2003 against the County of Nassau, its Civil Service Commission, and John Carway, alleging First Amendment violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, constructive discharge, and defamation. A jury trial from October 27 to November 6, 2009, found in Thorsen's favor on two Section 1983 claims, awarding $1,500,000 for emotional distress and $500,000 in punitive damages against Carway. The court later dismissed one Section 1983 claim. Defendants moved for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial, citing errors in the verdict sheet, excessive damages, inconsistent verdict, and insufficient evidence. The court granted the motion in part and denied in part, upholding the jury's findings on liability but reducing the emotional distress award to $500,000 via remittitur, contingent on Thorsen's acceptance.

Political AffiliationFirst AmendmentSection 1983Emotional DistressPunitive DamagesRemittiturJudgment as a Matter of LawNew TrialConstructive DischargeNassau County
References
49
Case No. CV 96-1098
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 13, 1999

Tucker v. Kenney

Plaintiff David C. Tucker initiated two separate actions, later consolidated under Docket Number CV 96-1098, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged constitutional rights violations by his court-appointed attorney, Patricia Kenney, and the Legal Aid Society, claiming Kenney impermissibly waived his right to release under New York Criminal Procedure Law § 180.80. Tucker also sued Police Officers Gross, Colgan, Pannaman, and Kuebler for alleged false statements, warrantless arrest, and unjustified charges. The Legal Aid defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that court-appointed attorneys do not act 'under color of State law' for Section 1983 purposes. The Court granted the Legal Aid defendants' motion to dismiss the Section 1983 claim with prejudice, and also dismissed Tucker's state law claim for legal malpractice against them without prejudice, declining supplemental jurisdiction.

Civil RightsSection 1983Pro Se LitigantCourt-Appointed CounselLegal MalpracticeMotion to DismissColor of State LawSupplemental JurisdictionConsolidation of ActionsCriminal Procedure Law § 180.80
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Peres v. Oceanside Union Free School District

Mary Peres, a high school teacher and Student Projects Coordinator for over thirty years, sued Oceanside Union Free School District, Herbert R. Brown, Dorie C. Ciulla, and Richard Roschelle. Peres alleged violations of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, age discrimination under the ADEA and NYSHRL, and state law claims including breach of contract and defamation. Her claims stem from her termination as SP Coordinator, which she attributes to reporting financial improprieties by other District employees and age discrimination, as well as being coerced into signing a disciplinary letter. Defendant Roschelle moved to dismiss the complaint. The court granted dismissal of Peres's ADEA claims, Section 1983 claims based on deprivation of property interest, breach of contract, and defamation claims. However, the court denied dismissal of her NYSHRL claims and Section 1983 claims based on First Amendment retaliation and deprivation of a protected liberty interest.

Age DiscriminationFirst AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessRetaliationWhistleblowerSection 1983Employment LawMotion to DismissNYSHRL
References
30
Showing 1-10 of 5,472 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