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
Aug 10, 2008

Perrin v. Bayville Village Board

This case involves a CPLR article 78 proceeding brought by neighboring property owners (petitioners) to challenge two determinations made by the Village Board of the Village of Bayville. The determinations authorized the Mayor to enter a license agreement with Nassau County for the installation of microwave dish and omnidirectional antennae on village property and issued a negative declaration under SEQRA. The Supreme Court dismissed the proceeding. On appeal, the higher court converted the challenge to the license agreement into an action for a declaratory judgment. It ultimately declared that the installation of the antennae would not violate a restrictive covenant on the property, modifying the Supreme Court's order and judgment. The dismissal of the petitioners' challenge to the SEQRA negative declaration was affirmed, finding that the Village Board took a 'hard look' at environmental concerns.

Restrictive CovenantZoningEnvironmental Quality Review ActSEQRADeclaratory JudgmentAppellate ReviewTelecommunications EquipmentRadio Frequency RadiationProperty LawLand Use
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Village of Southampton v. Village of Southampton Police Benevolent Ass'n

The Village of Southampton initiated a petition to permanently stay an arbitration sought by the Village of Southampton Police Benevolent Association (PBA). The PBA had demanded arbitration concerning benefits for former police sergeant Christopher A. Broich, who was terminated in 2007 for misconduct, a decision upheld by the Appellate Division. Broich's claims for benefits arose after he was granted World Trade Center accidental disability retirement benefits, prompting the PBA to argue for the reinstatement of various village benefits under their collective bargaining agreement. The Village contended that Broich, as a terminated employee, was ineligible for such benefits and that prior court judgments affirming his termination had res judicata effect. The court sided with the Village, granting the petition to permanently stay arbitration and denying the PBA's cross-motion, concluding that Broich's status as a terminated employee meant he could not invoke the CBA's grievance procedure and that res judicata applied.

ArbitrationStay of ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementPublic Employment Relations BoardRes JudicataTermination of EmploymentEmployee BenefitsDisability RetirementWorkers' CompensationMisconduct
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Village of Chestnut Ridge v. Town of Ramapo

This case involves an appeal brought by four villages and two residents of the Town of Ramapo challenging a local law enacted by the Town Board. The local law permits adult student living facilities in certain residential zones adjacent to the appellant villages. The appellants' combined petition asserted thirteen causes of action, primarily alleging the Town's failure to comply with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), inconsistency with the Town's comprehensive plan, and procedural infirmities in the adoption of the local law. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the amended petition, finding that the villages lacked legal capacity to sue and that all appellants lacked standing for various claims. The appellate court modified this decision, ruling that the villages had the capacity to sue and standing to assert claims under SEQRA and General Municipal Law § 239-m. The court also found that the resident appellants had standing for specific claims related to procedural compliance and consistency with the comprehensive plan. The case was ultimately remitted to the Supreme Court for a determination on the merits of the reinstated causes of action.

Zoning LawLocal Law ChallengeEnvironmental ReviewSEQRAStanding to SueLegal Capacity to SueMunicipal Home Rule LawGeneral Municipal LawVillage LawTown Law
References
98
Case No. 01-08-00918-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2010

Rasa Floors, LP v. Spring Village Partners, Ltd.

An apartment complex owner (Spring Village Partners, Ltd.) hired a contractor (Rasa Floors, L.P.) to install new flooring. A dispute arose over billing and workmanship, leading Rasa Floors to sue on a sworn account and for breach of contract or quantum meruit, and Spring Village to countersue for breach of contract, warranty, and fraud. A jury found for Spring Village on breach of warranty ($5,000) and for Rasa Floors on quantum meruit ($30,000). The trial court disregarded the quantum meruit finding. The appellate court affirmed the breach of warranty finding, reversed the trial court's disregard of the quantum meruit award, and remanded the case for entry of a new judgment reflecting the offset and for reconsideration of attorney's fees.

Contract DisputeQuantum MeruitBreach of WarrantySworn AccountAttorney's FeesJury VerdictOffset DamagesConstruction LawPleading DefectsAppellate Review
References
14
Case No. 14-08-00493-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 21, 2009

BACM 2002 PB2 Westpark Dr LP, Houston Parkwest Place Ltd, as the Property Owners and the Property Owners v. Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District

This appeal concerns a lawsuit where a former property owner initiated judicial review of an ad valorem tax valuation protest by the county appraisal district. A subsequent property purchaser was later included as a plaintiff. The appraisal district challenged the plaintiffs' standing through a plea to the jurisdiction, leading the trial court to dismiss the suit. The appellate court affirmed this dismissal, concluding that neither the initial property owner (BACM 2002 PB2 Westpark Dr. LP) nor the subsequent owner (Houston Parkwest Place Ltd.) possessed the requisite standing to pursue judicial review. Consequently, the trial court was found to lack subject-matter jurisdiction over the dispute.

Property TaxAd Valorem TaxJudicial ReviewStanding DoctrineSubject-Matter JurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Tax CodeTexas Rule of Civil Procedure 28Appellate ProcedureProperty Ownership
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ferreira v. Village of Kings Point

A plaintiff was injured when a trench collapsed during water main repairs. He initiated an action against the Village of Kings Point and Carlo Lizza & Sons Paving, Inc., alleging violations of Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6). The Supreme Court correctly granted summary judgment to the Village on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim, ruling that trench collapses are not within its ambit. However, the court erred by granting summary judgment on the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim, as the Industrial Code provisions 12 NYCRR 23-4.2 and 23-4.4, relied upon by the plaintiff, were deemed sufficiently specific to support the claim. The case examines owner liability under Labor Law and the specificity required for Industrial Code violations.

Trench collapseLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Industrial Code 12 NYCRR 23-4.2Industrial Code 12 NYCRR 23-4.4Owner liabilitySummary judgmentNondelegable dutyConstruction site accidentExcavation safety
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Town of North Hempstead v. Village of North Hills

Plaintiffs, including the Town of North Hempstead, homeowners, and residents, initiated an action against various Village defendants to enforce federal environmental laws, challenging land use and zoning decisions, specifically the downzoning of certain parcels in the Village of North Hills. Frank Martucci and Roslyn Pines, Inc., owners of a significantly affected 29.1-acre tract, sought to intervene as defendants, citing their direct interest in the property and the potential negative impact of the lawsuit on their development plans and economic interests. Plaintiffs opposed their intervention, primarily on technical grounds regarding the sufficiency of their application. The court ultimately granted the motion to intervene, finding that Martucci and Roslyn Pines, Inc. met all requirements of Rule 24(a), F.R.Civ.P., as their interests were not adequately represented by the existing governmental defendants and their active participation would ensure a more robust presentation of the economic arguments pertinent to the case.

Environmental LawLand UseZoningIntervention as of RightRule 24(a) F.R.Civ.P.Real EstateProperty RightsAdequate RepresentationEconomic InterestsMunicipal Law
References
7
Case No. 03-06-00572-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 10, 2009

Village of Salado v. Lone Star Storage Trailer, II Ltd. and Lone Star Storage Trailer

The Village of Salado annexed property, including land owned by Lone Star Storage Trailer, II Ltd. and Lone Star Storage Trailer. Lone Star filed a declaratory judgment action, arguing the annexation ordinance was void. The district court granted Lone Star's motion for summary judgment and declared the ordinance void. The Village appealed, challenging the district court's interpretation of Local Government Code section 43.025 regarding voluntary annexation and the contiguity requirement. The appellate court disagreed with Lone Star's contention that consent from all contiguous property owners was required, finding such an interpretation would frustrate legislative intent and lead to arbitrary results. The court reversed the district court's judgment, rendered judgment that the annexation ordinance is valid, and remanded the issue of attorney's fees to the district court for further determination.

AnnexationVoluntary AnnexationLocal Government CodeStatutory ConstructionContiguitySummary JudgmentDeclaratory JudgmentAppellate ReviewTexas LawProperty Rights
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Village of Tarrytown v. Planning Board

The Village of Tarrytown initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the Planning Board of the Village of Sleepy Hollow's negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The Planning Board had approved a subdivision for County House Road, LLC, to build 11 homes on an 11.9-acre parcel in Sleepy Hollow. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, granted Tarrytown's petition, annulling the negative declaration and enjoining further approvals until an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared for all 60 acres owned by County House Road, LLC, including properties in Tarrytown. On appeal, the judgment was reversed, the petition denied, and the Planning Board's determination confirmed. The appellate court found that the Planning Board took the required 'hard look' at environmental concerns and that the Sleepy Hollow development was not improperly segmented from the Tarrytown properties, which were under a building moratorium and thus speculative.

Environmental ReviewSEQRANegative DeclarationSubdivision ApprovalZoning MoratoriumCPLR Article 78Appellate ReviewSegmented ReviewCumulative ImpactsLand Development
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 13, 2000

Bordeau v. Village of Deposit

Plaintiffs Brian K. Bordeau, Francis Laundry Jr., and Jeffrey S. Laundry initiated a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of their First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, as well as New York State common law claims, against the Village of Deposit, its Police Chief Jon Bowie, and Village Justice Peter McDade. The lawsuit arose from an incident in May 1997 involving alleged unlawful arrest, excessive force, and malicious prosecution. Defendants moved for summary judgment on several causes of action. The court denied summary judgment for claims of false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution against Chief Bowie, and a state law assault and battery claim against Justice McDade. However, it granted summary judgment dismissing claims against the Village related to an alleged pattern of unconstitutional conduct and claims against Justice McDade based on judicial immunity. Additionally, all claims against the New York State Troopers, the Village Police Department, and punitive damages against the Village were dismissed. The case will proceed to trial on the remaining federal and state law claims.

Civil RightsSection 1983False ArrestFalse ImprisonmentMalicious ProsecutionMunicipal LiabilityJudicial ImmunityExcessive ForceSummary JudgmentConstitutional Law
References
36
Showing 1-10 of 1,840 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