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

LIN Television Corp. v. National Ass'n of Broadcast Employees & Technicians—Communications Workers

Plaintiff LIN Television Corporation sought to vacate a labor arbitration award that reinstated employee Timothy Flynn after his termination for making threats. Defendants, National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians—Communications Workers of America, counter-claimed to enforce the award. The arbitration found no "just cause" for termination, converting it to a suspension and mandating a positive psychiatric evaluation for Flynn's return. The U.S. District Court, reviewing cross-motions for summary judgment, confirmed the arbitration award. The court ruled that the award drew its essence from the collective bargaining agreement and did not violate public policy regarding workplace safety, thereby denying the plaintiff's motion and granting the defendants' motion.

Labor DisputeArbitration AwardVacaturEnforcementWorkplace SafetyCollective Bargaining AgreementJust CauseEmployee TerminationMental Health EvaluationFederal Court Review
References
26
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 05114 [129 AD3d 525]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2015

Matter of Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. v. Union of Automotive Technicians

This case involves an appeal regarding an arbitration award concerning an E-Z Pass benefit for retired members of the Union of Automotive Technicians. The Supreme Court, New York County, modified the arbitration award to rule that the E-Z Pass benefit is a vested lifetime benefit. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed this judgment, citing its disposition in previous appeals with similar issues. The court concluded that the Supreme Court reached the correct result based on established precedent.

Arbitration AwardE-Z Pass BenefitVested Lifetime BenefitPublic Employee UnionCollective BargainingAppellate ReviewJudicial PrecedentMemorandum of AgreementLabor DisputeAffirmance
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re National Ass'n of Broadcast Employees & Technicians

The National Association of Broadcast Employees & Technicians (NABET) petitioned to vacate an arbitration award from March 22, 1987, which enjoined the Union from interfering with the National Broadcasting Company's (NBC) training operations. NBC had sought expedited arbitration after alleged threats of picketing during strike preparations. NABET argued the umpire exceeded his authority, the award was vague, and demonstrated partiality. The court, presided over by Judge Cedarbaum, denied NABET's petition and granted NBC's cross-motion to confirm the award. The judge found the umpire acted within his powers, the award was sufficiently definite, and there was no evidence of manifest disregard for the law or evident partiality.

arbitration awardvacate arbitrationconfirm arbitrationlabor disputeunion interferenceexpedited arbitrationFederal Arbitration ActNorris-LaGuardia Actmanifest disregard of lawevident partiality
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Ickes v. Sayville Animal Hospital

Claimant, a veterinary technician, suffered a work-related injury and received workers' compensation benefits. The carrier sought to suspend payments due to the claimant's failure to provide a work status affidavit. At a hearing, the carrier introduced the issue of voluntary withdrawal from the labor market without prior notice to the claimant, which the WCLJ promptly dismissed. Despite the WCLJ's ruling, the Workers' Compensation Board later modified the decision, finding voluntary withdrawal and rescinding benefits. On appeal, the court reversed the Board's rescission of benefits, ruling that the claimant was denied due process as she had no notice or opportunity to address the voluntary withdrawal issue. The case was remitted to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the court's decision.

Workers' CompensationLabor Market WithdrawalDue ProcessNotice of IssueAppellate ReviewRemandBenefit SuspensionAdministrative LawWorkers' Compensation BoardJudicial Modification
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Schenectady County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc. v. Mills

The case concerns a dissenting opinion regarding a request by petitioners to the Department of Education for the business addresses of licensed veterinarians and veterinary technicians in Schenectady County. The Department maintains a database of nearly 800,000 licensed professionals but does not differentiate between residential and business addresses. While the majority concluded that disclosing business addresses would not violate personal privacy, the dissenting judge, Malone Jr., argues that disclosing residential addresses would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy, emphasizing a heightened privacy concern for home addresses. The dissent criticizes the majority's reliance on an advisory opinion and proposes that affected licensees should be given notice and an opportunity to intervene to protect their privacy rights. The final order reversed the prior judgment and granted the petition, allowing the disclosure of addresses.

Licensing InformationProfessional ConductPrivacy RightsPublic RecordsFreedom of Information LawResidential AddressesBusiness AddressesVeterinariansVeterinary TechniciansSchenectady County
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jean-Louis v. Metropolitan Cable Communications, Inc.

Current and former Metro technicians sued Metropolitan Cable Communications, Inc., its executives, and Time Warner Cable of New York City for unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendant Time Warner moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not a joint employer of the technicians. The Court applied the 'economic reality' test, assessing factors of formal and functional control. Finding that Time Warner lacked significant control over hiring, firing, schedules, payment, or records, and that most functional control factors also weighed against joint employment, the Court granted Time Warner's motion for summary judgment. The sole factor supporting joint employment, that Metro technicians worked exclusively for Time Warner, was deemed insufficient to establish an employer relationship.

FLSAOvertime PayJoint EmploymentEconomic Reality TestSummary JudgmentSubcontractingCable TechniciansEmployer-Employee RelationshipFormal ControlFunctional Control
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Plaintiff Volt Technical Services Corp. applied for H-2 visas for nuclear start-up technicians, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) denied, asserting the need was permanent, not temporary. After the denial was affirmed on appeal, Volt filed suit, alleging the INS's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the INS's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act § 101(a)(15)(H)(ii), which requires the employer's need for services to be temporary, not just the individual assignments. Finding that Volt demonstrated a recurring need for such technicians over several years, the court granted the INS's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Volt's.

Immigration LawH-2 visasNonimmigrant WorkersTemporary EmploymentImmigration and Nationality ActAdministrative Procedures ActDeclaratory Judgment ActAgency InterpretationJudicial ReviewNuclear Industry
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Danna v. New York Telephone Co.

In this memorandum opinion, the court addresses Plaintiff Fran Danna's application for backpay, equitable relief in the form of reinstatement, and prejudgment interest. A previous ruling dated November 17, 1990, found defendant New York Telephone liable for sex discrimination and sexual harassment in its demotion of Danna. The court awarded Danna $58,499.00 in backpay and $18,472.00 in prejudgment interest, for a total of $76,971.00, and ordered her reinstatement as a Service Technician. Damages were calculated based on the average salary of all Service Technicians, including those in Repair and Installation, considering Danna's history of seeking overtime. However, the court denied Danna's request for an additional 'historical multiplier' to further adjust her damages.

Sex DiscriminationSexual HarassmentTitle VIIBackpay AwardReinstatementPrejudgment InterestDamages CalculationOvertime CompensationService TechnicianHostile Work Environment
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lee v. Ambach

The petitioner, a physician, initiated a proceeding under CPLR article 78 to annul a determination by the Commissioner of Education. This determination suspended his license to practice medicine for one year, with the suspension stayed pending compliance with probation terms. Charges against the petitioner stemmed from his alleged misconduct as a pathologist, including directing an unlicensed lab technician to perform medical procedures (eviscerating cadavers unsupervised) and multiple incidents of sexual harassment of female hospital workers. While a hearing panel found him guilty of both categories of charges and recommended license revocation, the Board of Regents largely agreed only on the unsupervised technician charge and modified the penalty. The Board imposed a one-year concurrent suspension, stayed, with one year of probation requiring psychiatric care if necessary. The court reviewed the determination, found it supported by substantial evidence, and concluded that the disciplinary procedures did not violate the petitioner’s due process rights, thereby confirming the determination and dismissing the petition.

Medical License SuspensionProfessional MisconductUnsupervised Medical PracticeSexual Harassment AllegationsPathologist DisciplineBoard of Regents Decision ReviewCPLR Article 78 ProceedingSubstantial Evidence StandardDue Process RightsProbationary Period
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gordon v. Brown

A New York City police officer, referred to as 'Petitioner,' underwent a random drug screening in June 1991, testing positive for cocaine. Subsequently, he was charged with violating department rules and faced an administrative hearing. During the hearing, Dr. William Closson, the Director of Forensic Toxicology at Brunswick Hospital Center, testified regarding the EMIT and GC/MS tests performed on the petitioner's urine specimen. However, the laboratory technicians who conducted the tests were not produced for cross-examination. Petitioner was terminated based on the hearing officer's findings. He challenged his termination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, alleging a denial of due process due to the inability to cross-examine the technicians. The Appellate Division confirmed the Commissioner's determination, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that due process did not require the production of the laboratory personnel where the general reliability of the procedures was not disputed, the supervisor was subject to cross-examination, and no specific testing defect was claimed. The court also found the termination penalty was not unduly harsh.

due processadministrative lawpolice disciplinedrug screeningurinalysis testcocaine ingestionevidence rulescross-examination rightslaboratory proceduresforensic evidence
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 138 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