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 Golden Distributors, Ltd.

The debtor, Golden Distributors, Ltd., in a Chapter 11 case, moved to classify employee benefit claims, while several unions cross-moved for full administrative expense treatment. The court addressed the priority of sick leave, personal holidays, vacation, and severance pay for both union and non-union former employees. It concluded that most of these claims, including all severance pay and union vacation pay, qualify as administrative expenses or similar high-priority claims. However, all such employee claims were deemed subordinate to the super-priority secured liens held by the post-petition lenders.

BankruptcyChapter 11Administrative ExpensesEmployee BenefitsSeverance PayVacation PayCollective Bargaining AgreementSuper-priority LiensDebtor in PossessionUnions
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 02, 2010

Blyer v. ONE STOP KOSHER SUPERMARKET, INC.

Alvin Blyer, Regional Director of NLRB Region 29, petitioned the District Court for interim relief against One Stop Kosher Supermarket, Inc. under 29 U.S.C. § 160(j). The Director sought an order compelling One Stop to bargain with Local 338, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, after One Stop failed to honor a recognition agreement. The administrative law judge (ALJ) found the recognition agreement binding. The District Court granted the petition, finding reasonable cause for unfair labor practices and irreparable harm to the Union's collective bargaining rights, ordering One Stop to provide information and bargain, but stipulating that any agreement not be implemented until the NLRB's final decision.

National Labor Relations BoardUnfair Labor PracticesInterim InjunctionCollective BargainingUnion RecognitionLabor LawDistrict CourtSection 10(j)Employer-Union RelationsMandatary Injunction
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. v. United Food & Commercial Workers' Union Local 342

Plaintiff Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC ("Stop & Shop") sought a preliminary injunction to prevent Defendant United Food and Commercial Workers’ Union Local 342 ("Local 342" or "the union") from proceeding with an arbitration demand. The arbitration involves Stop & Shop's unilateral implementation of the "LMS system," an electronic system for managing inventory and manpower, which the union alleges violates their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Stop & Shop argues the arbitration clause in the CBA does not cover the LMS system. The Court asserted jurisdiction under the Labor Management Relations Act. Applying the principles from the "Steelworkers Trilogy," the court found the CBA's arbitration clause to be broad and determined that the union presented colorable arguments that the dispute regarding the LMS system implicates provisions related to "Prior Privileges" and "technological changes" in the CBA, as well as hours and wages. The court concluded that it could not say with "positive assurance" that the arbitration clause is not susceptible to an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Consequently, the court denied Stop & Shop's request for a preliminary injunction, allowing the arbitration to proceed.

Labor ArbitrationCollective BargainingPreliminary InjunctionArbitrabilityLabor DisputeLMS SystemUnion RightsEmployer Management RightsFederal CourtStatutory Interpretation
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

El Hassanein v. Yankee Stop Corp.

Claimant alleged an injury at Yankee Stop Corporation's delicatessen on January 23, 2005, and filed for workers' compensation benefits. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially denied the claim, ruling no employer-employee relationship existed. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this decision even after reopening the record for further evidence. The appellate court upheld the Board's determination, finding substantial evidence in the testimony of Yankee's owners, who denied claimant's employment, despite conflicting evidence. The court concluded that the Board was entitled to credit the owners' testimony and dismissed the claimant's allegations of WCLJ bias.

Workers' CompensationEmployer-Employee RelationshipSubstantial EvidenceFactual DeterminationCredibility of TestimonyAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardDenial of BenefitsJudicial Bias ClaimDelicatessen Injury
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Child World, Inc.

Child World, Inc., a debtor in Chapter 11, sought to reject 22 employment contracts with key employees whose services were terminated post-petition. The debtor aimed to classify resulting claims as pre-petition unsecured claims rather than administrative expenses under 11 U.S.C. § 365(g)(1). Respondent Herbert Hodus argued against rejection and contended that his severance pay should be an administrative expense priority. The court, applying a business judgment standard, granted the debtor's motion to reject the contracts. However, it determined that the salary continuation provision in the contracts did not constitute severance pay under Massachusetts law, thus classifying any breach of this obligation as a pre-petition unsecured general claim rather than an administrative expense.

BankruptcyExecutory ContractsContract RejectionSeverance PayAdministrative ExpensesUnsecured ClaimsChapter 11Business Judgment RulePost-Petition EmploymentMitigation of Damages
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Spectrum Information Technologies, Inc.

This bankruptcy case concerns two motions: the Debtors' request to reject John Marchione's employment agreement and Marchione's application for his severance pay claim to be treated as an administrative expense. John Marchione, former president of a debtor subsidiary, was involuntarily terminated post-petition. The Court, presided over by Chief Judge Conrad B. Duberstein in the Eastern District of New York, ruled that the employment agreement was not an executory contract at the time of the rejection motion. Citing established Second Circuit precedent, the Court held that Marchione's severance pay, despite being calculated based on length of service, accrues entirely upon post-petition termination and thus qualifies as an administrative expense entitled to priority under the Bankruptcy Code. Consequently, the Debtors' motion to reject was denied, and Marchione's claim for $75,000 was granted administrative expense priority.

BankruptcyExecutory ContractsEmployment AgreementSeverance PayAdministrative ExpensePriority ClaimRejection of ContractChapter 11Debtor-in-PossessionSecond Circuit Precedent
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wood v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

Anthony N. Wood, severely injured while employed by the Town of Stillwater Highway Department, settled a third-party action against Firestone Tire and Rubber Company for $1.1 million. The workers' compensation carrier, Saratoga County Self-Insured Plan, had a lien of over $63,000 for compensation and medical payments. Wood moved to apportion legal fees and expenses against the carrier's lien, arguing that the carrier's equitable share should consider the present value of estimated future benefits it would no longer have to pay, citing *Matter of Kelly v State Ins. Fund*. The Saratoga County Self-Insured Plan opposed, disputing the calculation of future benefits and arguing for consideration of potential future death benefits. The court, guided by *Kelly*, found the respondent's arguments lacked merit and applied a formula that included the lien amount plus the discounted value of future payments saved by the carrier. The court determined an equitable apportionment of $114,112.67, concluding that the offset exceeded the carrier's lien due to the substantial benefits the carrier received from the extinguishment of future obligations.

ApportionmentLegal FeesThird-Party ActionLien OffsetFuture Benefits CalculationEquitable ApportionmentSettlement ProceedsEconomist Expert WitnessPermanent DisabilityCarrier Liability
References
10
Case No. ADJ2595621 (AHM 0064504)
Regular
Feb 02, 2009

DAVID NAM vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review a prior award of $19,050.00 for medical expenses. The defendant argued the applicant did not incur the expenses and the paying entity wasn't seeking reimbursement. The Board found insufficient evidence that the medical injections were a compensation package for services rendered by the applicant in Korea, as the applicant did not personally pay and the arrangement with the church was unclear. The matter was returned to the trial level for further evidence development regarding the reasonableness of the medical charges and the nature of the agreement with the Korean chapel.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSouthern California EdisonDavid Namreconsiderationmedical expensesself-procured treatmentLabor Code 4600insulin injection therapycumulative traumacarpal tunnel syndrome
References
0
Case No. STK 161185, STK 172919
Regular
Apr 21, 2008

DARLINE STEWART vs. LEPRINO FOODS

This case concerns a lien claimant, Dr. Madireddi, seeking increased compensation for medical-legal reports. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, affirming the original decision but amending it to award Dr. Madireddi higher fees for her reports. The amended decision includes compensation for report preparation, stop-pay expenses, a 10% increase, and 7% annual interest for both reports.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLeprino FoodsDarline StewartLien ClaimantL. Neena MadireddiMedical-Legal ReportFindings and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationWCJFee
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 24, 2001

Claim of Langenmayr v. Syracuse University

In March 1992, a claimant left her secretarial job at Syracuse University due to respiratory problems from indoor air pollutants, subsequently filing for workers' compensation benefits which were established for occupational disease. She sought treatment from Dr. Kalpana Patel, who diagnosed multiple chemical sensitivities and recommended an emergency hospitalization in Texas, incurring $69,411.50 in medical expenses. The self-insured employer refused to pay these costs, arguing a lack of preauthorization and emergency justification under Workers’ Compensation Law § 13-a (5). After multiple hearings, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge ordered the employer to pay the hospital bill and found the claimant permanently totally disabled, a decision upheld by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the emergency nature of the treatment and the disability finding, thus obligating the employer to cover the medical expenses.

Occupational DiseasePermanent Total DisabilityMedical Expense ReimbursementEmergency Medical TreatmentMultiple Chemical Sensitivity SyndromeRespiratory IllnessSelf-Insured Employer LiabilityWorkers' Compensation Board AppealAppellate ReviewMedical Evidence Sufficiency
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 2,345 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