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
Jun 24, 2005

Mineola Union Free School District v. Mineola Teachers' Ass'n.

The petitioner, Mineóla Union Free School District, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, which had denied its motion to stay arbitration and granted the Mineóla Teachers’ Association's cross-motion to compel arbitration. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, ruling that the dispute, related to article 24 of the collective bargaining agreement, was indeed subject to arbitration. The court rejected the District's argument that an arbitration award favoring the Association would violate public policy, emphasizing the narrow scope of the public policy exception in public employment cases. It concluded that no law prohibited such an award and that upholding article 24 would not force the District to hire unqualified candidates, thus not violating Education Law §§ 3012 (1) (a) and 1709 (16).

ArbitrationCollective BargainingPublic EmploymentTaylor LawPublic Policy ExceptionEducation LawAppealNassau CountySchool DistrictTeachers Union
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 1982

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of Connetquot Central School District & Connetquot Teachers Ass'n

This dissenting opinion argues for affirming a Special Term's order directing a board of education to arbitrate a grievance filed by a teachers union. The union's claim involves continued use of office space in school district buildings, citing a collective bargaining agreement and past practice. The dissent contends that the arbitration clause is broad and encompasses the dispute, rejecting the employer's argument that law or public policy (specifically Education Law § 414 or Civil Service Law § 209-a) prohibits arbitration of this grievance. Justice O'Connor asserts that the union's use of office space for its statutory duties as a collective bargaining agent serves a "school purpose," similar to administrative and support services, and thus is not excluded by Education Law § 414. The dissent concludes that the order compelling arbitration should be affirmed.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceTeachers UnionBoard of EducationOffice SpaceSchool PropertyEducation LawCivil Service LawPublic Employment Relations Board
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lahendro v. New York State United Teachers Ass'n

Plaintiff Michael F. Lahendro, a guidance counselor, sued the New York State United Teachers Association (NYSUT) and Brushton-Moira Teachers Association for breach of the duty of fair representation and negligence after NYSUT failed to timely file a demand for a hearing against his employment termination. This oversight led Lahendro to accept a settlement including retirement. Defendants moved to dismiss the lawsuit, which the Supreme Court denied, leading to this appeal. The appellate court reversed, dismissing the breach of fair representation claim based on the 'Martin v Curran' rule, which requires proving all individual union members authorized or ratified the conduct for suits against unincorporated associations, which plaintiffs could not do. Additionally, the negligence claim was dismissed as actions against unions for duties under collective bargaining agreements must be for breach of fair representation.

Breach of Duty of Fair RepresentationNegligenceUnincorporated AssociationMartin v Curran RuleEducation LawCPLRLate FilingSettlement AgreementEmployment TerminationGuidance Counselor
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Union-Endicott Central School District v. Peters

Joanne Peters, a teacher, was denied retiree health insurance benefits by the Union-Endicott Central School District after allegations of theft. The District and its Board of Education commenced action No. 1 against Peters. Peters and the Endicott Teachers' Association (ETA) grieved the denial and compelled arbitration. An arbitrator found the District violated the CBA and that the "faithless servant doctrine" was inapplicable. The District and Board sought to amend their complaint to invoke the doctrine and recover damages, and to vacate the arbitration award. Supreme Court denied the amendments and refused to vacate the award. The appellate court affirmed the denial to vacate the arbitration award, finding the arbitrator resolved the issue of the faithless servant doctrine. The court also upheld the denial to amend the complaint, citing collateral estoppel, and modified the Supreme Court order to explicitly confirm the arbitration award.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementFaithless Servant DoctrineRetiree Health Insurance BenefitsCollateral EstoppelMotion to Amend ComplaintVacatur of Arbitration AwardEmployee MisconductSchool District DisputeTeacher Employment
References
21
Case No. 518428
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 04, 2014

Union-EndicottCentralSchoolDistrictvPeters

Joanne Peters, a teacher for the Union-Endicott Central School District, faced allegations of theft and sought to retire. A dispute arose regarding her entitlement to retiree health insurance benefits under a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The District initiated litigation and sought to stay arbitration over the benefits dispute, but arbitration was compelled and affirmed on appeal. The arbitrator later found the District violated the CBA and determined the faithless servant doctrine was inapplicable to deny Peters her benefits. Subsequently, the District and its Board of Education attempted to amend their complaint to re-assert the faithless servant doctrine and vacate the arbitration award, which the Supreme Court denied. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, concluding that the arbitrator properly addressed the doctrine and that collateral estoppel barred its relitigation. The Appellate Division further modified the order to explicitly confirm the arbitration award.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementFaithless Servant DoctrineRetiree Health BenefitsCollateral EstoppelAppellate ReviewEmployment LawSchool DistrictTeacher MisconductContractual Rights
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 1982

Board of Education of Dover Union Free School District v. Dover-Wingdale Teachers' Ass'n

The case concerns an appeal challenging an arbitrator's authority to set a compensatory formula for teachers facing oversized classes when a collective bargaining agreement stipulated negotiation for such issues. The Dover Union Free School District had violated class size limits for kindergarten, and subsequent negotiations with the union failed. The arbitrator, having reserved jurisdiction, issued a supplemental award for additional teacher pay. Special Term vacated this award, but the appellate court reversed, reinstating the arbitrator's decision. The court affirmed that arbitrators possess broad remedial powers to achieve a just result, even interpreting negotiation clauses to allow for monetary awards when parties cannot agree, especially in the absence of explicit contractual limitations on the arbitrator's authority.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementClass Size DisputeArbitrator AuthorityContract InterpretationRemediesNegotiation ClauseSchool DistrictTeachers' UnionAppellate Review
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers, Local Union No. 782 v. Texas Employment Commission

This case concerns an appeal by the International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, Local Union No. 782, AFI-CIO, and 99 individuals challenging a Texas Employment Commission (TEC) decision that denied unemployment compensation benefits. The dispute arose from a General Electric Company plant shutdown in 1957. The appellate court addressed jurisdictional issues related to the aggregate claims amount and venue for non-resident claimants. It affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the union as a party plaintiff, but reversed decisions regarding claimants deemed voluntarily unemployed or not totally unemployed who did not receive immediate vacation pay. The court affirmed the denial of benefits for 11 claimants who received vacation pay prior to the shutdown.

Unemployment CompensationJurisdictionVenueClass Action SuitVoluntary UnemploymentTotal UnemploymentVacation PayCollective Bargaining AgreementStatutory InterpretationJudicial Review
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Volpi v. Center Moriches Union Free School District

Plaintiff Joan Volpi brought an action alleging age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Center Moriches Union Free School District and several individual defendants. Volpi, a business teacher, claimed she was forced into early retirement in 2011 after being informed her department was eliminated due to budget cuts, despite being the oldest and highest-paid teacher to receive a 'pink slip.' She later found that the business department was not eliminated and younger teachers were retained. Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing the § 1983 claim was preempted by the ADEA, that individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, and that punitive damages were unavailable. The Court denied the motion in its entirety, finding that Second Circuit precedent allows § 1983 claims for distinct constitutional violations alongside ADEA claims, rejected the 'class of one' argument for age discrimination, and found sufficient allegations for liquidated damages.

Age DiscriminationADEA42 U.S.C. § 1983Equal ProtectionQualified ImmunityMotion for Judgment on the PleadingsPreemptionConstructive DischargeEmployment LawFederal Civil Procedure
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

International Union of Operating Engineers Local Union No. 17 v. Swank Associated Co.

The International Union of Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 17, initiated an action to compel arbitration against Swank Associated Company, Inc., following a labor grievance. Swank removed the case to federal court and filed a third-party action against Local 210, arguing the matter constituted a jurisdictional dispute not subject to arbitration. The court, presided over by Magistrate Judge Schroeder, examined the collective bargaining agreement to determine the arbitrability of the dispute. It concluded that while an arbitrator could determine if the issue was a jurisdictional dispute, they could not resolve it on the merits if it was found to be jurisdictional. Consequently, the plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings was denied, and the grievance was directed to arbitration solely to ascertain whether it constituted a jurisdictional dispute under the agreement.

Labor LawArbitration AgreementJurisdictional DisputesCollective BargainingLabor Management Relations ActFederal CourtPleadings MotionContract InterpretationArbitrabilityUnion Rights
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 17 v. Union Concrete & Construction Corp.

Plaintiff International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 17, AFL-CIO ("Local 17") filed a grievance against Union Concrete and Construction Corporation ("UCC") to compel arbitration regarding UCC's emergency snow removal work for Erie County in November 2014, alleging violations of their Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). UCC argued the work was not covered by the CBA's "Heavy and/or Highway Construction" definition, rendering the arbitration clause inapplicable. Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation to grant UCC's motion for summary judgment and deny Local 17's. United States District Judge Richard J. Arcara conducted a de novo review and adopted the Magistrate Judge's findings in their entirety, concluding that the emergency snow removal work did not constitute "Heavy and/or Highway Construction" under the CBA. Consequently, Local 17’s motion for summary judgment to compel arbitration was denied, and UCC’s motion for summary judgment was granted, leading to the closure of the case.

Labor Management Relations ActCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrabilitySummary JudgmentContract InterpretationEmergency Snow RemovalHeavy ConstructionHighway ConstructionScope of Arbitration ClauseDe Novo Review
References
26
Showing 1-10 of 2,349 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