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 Continental Air Lines, Corp.

This case addresses claims for accrued but unused sick leave filed by various unions and non-union individuals against Continental Air Lines, Inc. and Texas International Airlines, Inc., which are debtors in a Chapter 11 reorganization. The debtors sought summary judgment to disallow these claims for terminated employees, arguing that neither collective bargaining agreements nor the Corporate Policy Manual provided for cash payment of unused sick leave upon termination. The court affirmed its jurisdiction over such claims, rejecting arguments for deferral to a system board of adjustment. It found that the relevant agreements and past practices did not create a right to payment for unused sick leave upon termination. Consequently, the court granted summary judgment for the debtors, disallowing all sick leave claims by or on behalf of terminated Continental employees.

Bankruptcy LawChapter 11 ReorganizationAccrued Sick Leave ClaimsEmployee BenefitsCollective Bargaining AgreementsSummary JudgmentJurisdiction DisputeArbitrationTerminated EmployeesCorporate Policy Manual
References
4
Case No. 02 Civ. 7659(SAS)
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 2004

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 100 v. NYC Transit Auth.

This case involves a dispute between several labor unions and the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) and its subsidiary regarding the legality of NYCTA's sick leave policy under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The unions challenged the policy's medical inquiry requirements, arguing they violated ADA provisions against inquiries that may reveal a disability. The NYCTA justified its policy by citing the need to curb sick leave abuse and ensure workplace and public safety. The court applied the framework established in Conroy v. New York State Department of Correctional Services. It found that curbing sick leave abuse was a legitimate business necessity but only justified the policy for employees on a narrowly-defined "sick leave control list." The court also determined that ensuring safety was a vital business necessity, justifying the policy for safety-sensitive employees, specifically bus operators, but required further factual development for other employee groups. Ultimately, the court issued a declaratory judgment, clarifying the permissible scope of the policy's medical inquiries and rejecting the Authority's defenses of unclean hands and laches.

ADA ComplianceSick Leave PolicyMedical InquiryEmployment DiscriminationBusiness Necessity DefenseWorkplace SafetyPublic SafetyLabor Union LitigationCollective BargainingBus Operator
References
16
Case No. 02 Civ. 7659
Regular Panel Decision

Transport Workers Union v. New York City Transit Authority

This case addresses a conflict between the New York City Transit Authority's sick leave policy and its employees' privacy rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The plaintiff unions sought a declaratory judgment that the Authority's policy, requiring medical inquiries for sick leave, violated the ADA. The court found that the policy's inquiries fall within the ADA's prohibition. However, the court ruled that the policy is justified by business necessity for employees on a sick leave control list to curb abuse and for safety-sensitive employees like bus operators. A further trial is required to determine if safety concerns justify the policy for other employee groups. The court ultimately allowed the policy's enforcement to continue for now, pending further factual development.

Americans with Disabilities ActSick Leave PolicyMedical InquiriesBusiness Necessity DefenseWorkplace SafetyAbsenteeism AbuseLabor UnionsPublic TransportationDeclaratory JudgmentEmployer Policy
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between City of Amsterdam

Petitioner appealed an order denying its application to stay arbitration with respondent concerning a sick leave dispute. The dispute arose after petitioner sought reimbursement for sick leave paid to an employee, Richard Roginski, who was injured during outside employment. Petitioner argued that arbitration violated public policy, was precluded by Workers' Compensation Law, and that sick leave constituted an unconstitutional gift. The court affirmed the order, finding no significant public policy violation, clarifying that Workers' Compensation from an outside employer did not prevent sick leave use with the primary employer, and that sick leave provisions authorized by statute were not unconstitutional gifts.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementSick Leave BenefitsPublic EmploymentWorkers' CompensationOutside EmploymentConstitutional ChallengeMunicipal LawGrievance ProcedureAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. 03-18-00445-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 16, 2018

Texas Association of Business National Federation of Independent Business, American Staffing Association LeadingEdge Personnel, Ltd. Staff Force, Inc. HT Staffing Ltd. D/B/A the HT Group The Burnett Companies Consolidated, Inc., D/B/A Burnett Specialists Society for Human Resource Management Texas State Council of the Society for Human Resource Management Austin Human Resource Management Association Strickland School, LLC And the State of Texas v. City of Austin, Texas, and Spencer Cronk, City Manager of the City of Austin

This case is an interlocutory appeal challenging the City of Austin’s paid-sick-leave ordinance. The Texas Association of Business and other private parties, along with the State of Texas as intervenor, sued the City of Austin, asserting the ordinance is unconstitutional and preempted by the Texas Minimum Wage Act. The district court denied both the application for a temporary injunction and the City’s jurisdictional challenges. The appellate court reversed, holding that the district court had jurisdiction over the claims and that the City’s paid-sick-leave ordinance violates the Texas Constitution because it is preempted by the Texas Minimum Wage Act. The case was remanded for the issuance of the requested temporary injunction and further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Texas lawAustin ordinancepaid sick leavepreemptionTexas Minimum Wage Actconstitutional lawinterlocutory appealgovernmental immunityripenessstanding
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between United Environmental Workers & Buffalo Sewer Authority

An arbitrator determined that the Buffalo Sewer Authority (BSA) violated a collective bargaining agreement by refusing Robert Reinig sick days from a sick leave bank. Special Term subsequently vacated this award, arguing that it contravened the public policy against double recovery, as Mr. Reinig had also received workers' compensation benefits for the same period, indicating his absence was job-related. The appellate court disagreed, reversing Special Term's order. They emphasized that an arbitrator's award should not be vacated for errors of law or fact. Furthermore, the court found that the public policy protecting employers from double liability under Workers' Compensation Law was not violated, as the BSA did not contribute to the sick leave bank from which Mr. Reinig drew his sick days.

Arbitration AwardCollective BargainingSick Leave BenefitsWorkers' Compensation LawPublic Policy ExceptionDouble Recovery ProhibitionEmployer LiabilityAppellate ReversalJudicial ReviewGrievance Procedure
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Chavkin v. Santaella

The petitioner, a male probation officer in New York City, sought to use accrued sick leave in conjunction with infant care leave for his second child, but was denied based on a departmental regulation. This regulation permitted only pregnant female employees to utilize sick leave for infant care leave without requiring medical proof of disability. The petitioner filed a sex discrimination complaint with the State Division of Human Rights, which was dismissed for lack of probable cause, a decision upheld by the State Human Rights Appeal Board. The court found that the Division's investigation was inadequate and its interpretation of the regulation erroneous, noting that the policy appeared to discriminate by allowing mothers to use sick leave without proof of disability while denying fathers. Consequently, the court annulled the Board's determination and remanded the case to the State Division of Human Rights for further investigation and a consistent determination of rights.

Sex DiscriminationInfant Care LeaveSick Leave PolicyParental LeaveHuman Rights LawEmployment DiscriminationProbation OfficerNew York City Department of ProbationState Human Rights Appeal BoardRemand
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 01, 2008

Barresi v. County of Suffolk

The petitioner appealed an order and judgment dismissing their CPLR article 78 proceeding, which sought to compel a determination regarding back pay and sick leave benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c. The initial claim was denied in 1992, and review was postponed until a worker's compensation decision in 2001. The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dismissed the petition based on the statute of limitations and the doctrine of laches, as the petitioner failed to make a timely demand for GML § 207-c benefits after the worker's compensation decision. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the CPLR article 78 proceeding was untimely, as the statute of limitations expired even considering later correspondence as a demand and denial, and subsequent requests for reconsideration did not revive the claim.

CPLR Article 78MandamusBack PaySick Leave BenefitsGeneral Municipal Law § 207-cStatute of LimitationsLachesWorker's Compensation ClaimAppeal DismissalGovernment Benefits
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 03, 2015

Gesualdi v. Seacoast Petroleum Products, Inc.

Plaintiffs, the Trustees and Fiduciaries of various Local 282 Welfare, Pension, Annuity, Job Training, and Vacation and Sick Leave Trust Funds, initiated an action against Seacoast Petroleum Products, Inc. to recover unpaid liabilities and contributions. This action arose from two audits that identified delinquent contributions and the defendant's complete withdrawal from the Funds. Following Seacoast Petroleum Products, Inc.'s default, the Plaintiffs moved for a default judgment. United States Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke recommended granting the motion and awarding specific damages. District Judge Spatt subsequently adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety, granting the default judgment and ordering damages totaling $156,898.74, along with daily interest, liquidated damages, audit fees, attorneys' fees, and costs.

Default JudgmentERISAUnpaid ContributionsWithdrawal LiabilityEmployee BenefitsMulti-employer PlansCollective Bargaining AgreementTrust AgreementPrejudgment InterestLiquidated Damages
References
48
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Cruz

The dissenting opinion argues against affirming a restitution award to Nassau County. The majority held Nassau County is a "victim" under Penal Law § 60.27 for sick leave and medical bills paid to a police officer injured during a burglary. The dissent contends that statutory interpretation and public policy preclude reimbursing a municipal law enforcement agency for foreseeable operating costs, including personnel costs. It asserts that sick leave payments are not "actual out-of-pocket loss" and, referencing People v Rowe, law enforcement agencies are not "victims" for normal operating expenses. The dissent criticizes the distinction between operational and employment functions, arguing that costs for officer injuries are inherent to crime-fighting and should not be recovered from the defendant without specific statutory authorization.

restitutionPenal Law § 60.27victim statuslaw enforcement agencyoperating costssick leavemunicipal liabilitypolice officer injurystatutory interpretationlegislative intent
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 3,791 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