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
Mar 19, 2015

Matter of Suit-Kote Corporation v. Rivera

Petitioner, a highway construction contractor, challenged the prevailing wage rates set by the respondent for operating engineers, laborers, and teamsters for public work projects. Petitioner alleged that respondent failed to ensure that the collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) used to determine these rates covered at least 30% of the workers, as required by Labor Law § 220. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and denied petitioner's request for disclosure. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed, with the court holding that the burden of proving that less than 30% of workers were covered rests with the employer. The appellate court also found the respondent's method for determining wage rates was not arbitrary or capricious and that the request for disclosure was overly broad, thus upholding the denial.

Prevailing WagePublic Work ProjectsCollective Bargaining AgreementsLabor Law ComplianceBurden of ProofDisclosureCPLR Article 78 ProceedingAdministrative ReviewWage Rate DeterminationHighway Construction
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 1981

Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. McCollum

The case concerns an appeal of a workers' compensation award where the key dispute was the average weekly wage rate. The trial court's finding on the wage rate was based on a purported stipulation, which the defendant carrier disputed, citing non-compliance with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 11. The appellate court, authored by Justice Akin, determined that the alleged stipulation failed to meet Rule 11's requirements, which mandates agreements to be in writing and signed or made in open court and entered of record. Consequently, the court found no evidence to support the wage rate finding, reversing the judgment and remanding the entire case for a new trial, aligning with the principle against piecemeal litigation in workers' compensation cases.

Workers' CompensationStipulation EnforceabilityTexas Rules of Civil Procedure 11Average Weekly Wage RateEvidence SufficiencyReversal and RemandAppellate ProcedureTrial Court ErrorOral AgreementsIndivisible Cause of Action
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 26, 2005

County of Suffolk v. Coram Equities, LLC

The plaintiff appealed an order denying its motion to compel the defendant to pay prevailing hourly wage rates for a building construction project. The case stemmed from a lease agreement where the defendant, as owner, agreed to construct a building and lease space to the plaintiff, including a clause for prevailing wages "in accordance with New York Labor Law Section 220." Both the Supreme Court and the appellate court affirmed the decision, finding that Labor Law § 220 did not apply to the project. The courts reasoned that the construction did not qualify as a "public works project," a necessary condition for the application of Labor Law § 220. Consequently, the defendant's failure to pay prevailing wages was not a breach of the contractual agreement.

Prevailing Wage LawPublic Works DoctrineLease Contract DisputeLabor Law 220Contractual ObligationAppellate AffirmationConstruction WagesSuffolk County CourtsNew York State LawSpecific Performance Action
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 41 v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

Plaintiffs challenged the defendants' wage rate determinations for work on Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP) projects, arguing that HUD's regulation 24 C.F.R. § 968.3 improperly classified 'development' work as 'operation' work, leading to lower wages. They also alleged violations of New York State Public Housing and Labor Laws. The court dismissed the federal claims (Counts One through Four) for lack of jurisdiction due to the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust administrative remedies with the Wage and Hour Administrator, emphasizing the need for agency expertise. The remaining state law claim (Count Five) was dismissed without prejudice due to the absence of federal claims, leading to the dismissal of the entire complaint against all defendants.

Wage Rate DisputesComprehensive Improvement Assistance ProgramHousing Act of 1937Davis-Bacon ActAdministrative Exhaustion DoctrineStatutory InterpretationHUD RegulationsFederal Court JurisdictionPendent JurisdictionPublic Housing Projects
References
7
Case No. 2016-02-0436
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 06, 2017

Richards, Michael v. A-1 Expert Tree Service

Michael C. Richards filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking temporary disability benefits, disputing his average weekly wage and compensation rate. He claimed an average weekly wage of at least $400.00, supported by his and his girlfriend's testimonies of working over forty hours per week. A-1 Expert Tree Service acknowledged an initial miscalculation but argued for a lower average weekly wage of $244.09. The Court found that while Mr. Richards is likely to prevail, he did not provide sufficient evidence for his requested rate. Based on the available, albeit incomplete, wage statements, the Court determined Mr. Richards' average weekly wage to be $250.00 per week and his compensation rate to be $166.67, ordering A-1 to pay any underpayment.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingAverage Weekly WageTemporary Disability BenefitsCompensation RateWage StatementBurden of ProofEmployee TestimonyEmployer RecordsUnderpayment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 01, 1996

99 Realty Co. v. Wall Street Transcript Corp.

This case involves a dispute over porter wage escalation charges and rent recovery. The Civil Court's decision to include vacation and sick days as components of the wage rate was affirmed, as these benefits are explicitly referenced in the wage clauses. The court also agreed that the 23rd-floor lease did not change the base year but adjusted the rent calculation formula. The appeals court modified the judgment to include Social Security, Federal unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation payments within the wage rate, increasing the landlord’s recovery to $246,116.69. This interpretation aligns with the purpose of the wage rate as an index for increased economic costs and ensures all contract provisions are given effect. Consequently, the tenant’s claim for recoupment of alleged overpayments was rendered moot.

Porter Wage EscalationRent RecoveryLease AgreementWage Rate DefinitionCollective Bargaining AgreementSocial SecurityUnemployment InsuranceWorkers' CompensationContract InterpretationCivil Court Decision
References
2
Case No. Dkt.# 63
Regular Panel Decision

Conner v. Celanese, Ltd.

This case involves two plaintiffs, Hazel Conner and Sytheria Tucker, who sued their employer, Celanese, Ltd., alleging breach of employment contract, violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for overtime and retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) for Tucker. The dispute arose from a change in shift structure in 1987 from 8-hour to 12-hour shifts, where employees on 12-hour shifts were paid a lower hourly rate, adjusted to maintain annualized wages, which plaintiffs claim was not properly disclosed. The Court denied summary judgment on the breach of contract claim due to factual disputes over wage modification. However, summary judgment was granted for the defendant on the FLSA overtime and retaliation claims, as the 'regular rate' for overtime was the rate actually paid, and alleged actions did not constitute an 'ultimate employment decision.' Summary judgment was also granted for the defendant on Tucker's IIED claim, finding the conduct not extreme and outrageous.

Employment LawBreach of ContractWage DisputeFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)Overtime PayFLSA RetaliationSummary JudgmentConstructive DischargeIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)Texas Law
References
47
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

C.E.L. Lumber, Inc. v. Roberts

The petitioner, a contracting business, was hired to convert a two-family house into a community residence in Franklin County. A Department of Labor inspection found the petitioner was paying employees less than prevailing wages for public works projects, initially advising residential rates. Later, the Department asserted the higher general construction rate applied, withholding funds and assessing a $6,260 underpayment plus interest. A subsequent hearing upheld the general rate and deemed the underpayment willful, imposing a $750 civil penalty and 10% punitive interest. This court affirmed the applicability of the general wage rate, but annulled the $750 civil penalty and reduced the interest rate to 6%, finding no evidence of willful underpayment given the petitioner's immediate compliance and lack of prior violations. The matter was remitted for further proceedings consistent with the modification.

Public Works ProjectPrevailing WageUnderpaid WagesCivil PenaltyLabor Law § 220CPLR Article 78Community ResidenceGeneral Construction RateResidential Construction RateWillful Underpayment
References
1
Case No. ADJ6438203, ADJ8190271
Regular
Dec 13, 2018

SANDRA BROOKS vs. E. I. DUPONT, BROADSPIRE

This case involves an applicant with industrial injuries to her knees and spine sustained in 2002 and 2003, who continued to work for the defendant employer, receiving pay raises, until her temporary disability began in 2007. The defendant disputed the calculation of the applicant's temporary disability rate, advocating for a rate based on pre-injury wages. The Board affirmed the prior order, clarifying that the temporary disability rate should be based on the applicant's actual wages earned at the time her temporary disability commenced in 2007, recognizing her post-injury wage progression.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSandra BrooksE. I. DupontBroadsPIREADJ6438203ADJ8190271Opinion and Decision After Reconsiderationindustrial injuriesbilateral kneeslumbar spine
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers Insurance Ass'n v. Bewley

This worker's compensation case involved Leonard Ray Bewley, who was injured while operating a backhoe for Lambert Construction Company. The central dispute was whether Bewley was an employee or an independent contractor, determining his eligibility for worker's compensation benefits. The jury initially found Bewley to be an employee and awarded benefits, including findings on his working days and wage rates. The Insurance Association appealed, challenging the sufficiency of evidence for Bewley's employee status, the 210-day work period, and the calculated wage rates. The court affirmed the jury's finding of employee status, concluding that contradictory reasonable inferences from the facts presented a valid question for the jury. However, the court found insufficient legal evidence to support the jury's determination of Bewley's average daily wage and average weekly earning capacity, noting that Bewley's income included equipment rental and lacked specific wage documentation under the elected statutory method. Consequently, the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings due to the erroneous entry of judgment based on unsupported wage findings.

Independent ContractorEmployee StatusWage Rate CalculationWorker's CompensationTexas LawJury FindingsSufficiency of EvidenceStatutory InterpretationAverage Weekly WageDaily Wage
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 7,969 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