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 the Arbitration between Carey & Westinghouse Electric Corp.

The case involves cross-appeals from an order of Special Term concerning the arbitration of discharge grievances in Buffalo and furlough grievances in Sharon under a collective bargaining agreement. The Special Term had denied arbitration for the Buffalo discharge grievances, which the appellate court found to be a misconception of the court's role in arbitration. The appellate court emphasized that only the existence of an agreement to arbitrate and a dispute thereunder should be considered, leaving matters of law and fact to the arbitrators. The court also deemed the question of public policy overriding arbitration rules premature. Regarding the Sharon furlough claims, the Special Term's decision to compel arbitration was affirmed, with the appellate court rejecting claims of Federal preemption. The final order was modified to grant the petitioner's motion to compel arbitration for the Buffalo discharge grievances and affirmed in all other respects.

ArbitrationCollective BargainingLabor DisputeDischarge GrievancesFurlough GrievancesCross-AppealSpecial Term OrderPublic PolicyFederal PreemptionAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carey v. General Electric Company

This case involves a motion by the International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers (Union) to compel General Electric Company (Company) to arbitrate twelve grievances. The District Court, presided over by Judge Palmieri, examined questions of governing law, procedural arbitrability, substantive arbitrability, and the effect of NLRB jurisdiction. The court applied federal labor law, resolving doubts in favor of arbitration, and found most grievances arbitrable. However, arbitration for National Docket No. 4557 was denied because the Union's claim was based on an unlawful contract provision that discouraged membership in other unions.

Labor ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementGrievance ProcedureProcedural ArbitrabilitySubstantive ArbitrabilityFederal Labor LawNLRB JurisdictionSeniority RightsWage DisputesJob Classification
References
39
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07843 [192 AD3d 25]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2020

Matter of Hackett

Mark J. Hackett, Jr., a suspended attorney, was found guilty of professional misconduct by the Grievance Committee of the Seventh Judicial District. He neglected a client's workers' compensation matter, failing to advise her properly regarding CMS debt and subsequently not responding to her inquiries. Hackett also failed to cooperate with the Grievance Committee's investigation and defaulted in the disciplinary proceedings. The court suspended him from the practice of law for two years, citing harm to the client and disregard for the disciplinary process.

Attorney misconductprofessional ethicsneglect of client matterfailure to cooperatedisciplinary actionattorney suspensionWorkers' CompensationCMS debtRules of Professional Conductdefault judgment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brynien v. Governor's Office of Employee Relations

This case is an appeal of a Supreme Court judgment that dismissed petitioner’s applications to review denials of out-of-title work grievances. The petitioner, representing five state employees at the Office of Mental Health (OMH), alleged that employees were improperly assigned duties of a Treatment Team Leader, a higher-grade position, violating their collective bargaining agreement and Civil Service Law § 61 (2). OMH and the Governor’s Office of Employee Relations (GOER) denied the grievances, finding the duties appropriate to the employees' titles. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, holding that GOER's determination was rational. The court found that the assigned duties were a reasonable extension of the employees' in-title duties and that the employees did not meet the minimum requirements for the higher-grade Treatment Team Leader position.

Out-of-title workGrievanceCivil Service LawCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee ClassificationJob DutiesSupervisory DutiesRational Basis ReviewAdministrative LawJudicial Review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Ciervo

The Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts brought a charge of professional misconduct against respondent Ralph E. Ciervo for failing to cooperate with investigations regarding complaints from Herbert S. Gulston and Julie Medina. A Special Referee sustained the charge, and the Grievance Committee moved to confirm the report. The respondent admitted to the non-cooperation, citing personal difficulties including job loss, recession impact on his practice, and severe injuries from accidents leading to depression and impaired judgment due to pain medication. The Court granted the motion to confirm the Special Referee’s report and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for one year, with conditions for reinstatement including medical reports on his physical and mental health.

Professional misconductAttorney suspensionGrievance CommitteeFailure to cooperateRules of Professional ConductMitigationMedical conditionMental healthReinstatement conditionsDisciplinary action
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hygiene Industries v. Plastic, Metal, Novelty & Allied Workers' Union Local 132-98

Hygiene Industries sought to prevent Plastic, Metal, Novelty and Allied Workers’ Union, Local 132-98, I.L.G.W.U. from arbitrating a grievance concerning the proposed closure of two plants in Brooklyn, New York. Hygiene argued the dispute was not arbitrable because the collective bargaining and settlement agreements might expire before the plant closings. The Union contended that the settlement agreement’s duration was tied to Hygiene’s operations in Sardis, Mississippi, and that the broad arbitration clauses covered the dispute. The court emphasized the strong federal policy favoring arbitration in labor disputes. Ultimately, the motion to enjoin arbitration was denied, as the court found the expiration date of the Settlement Agreement ambiguous and a matter for the arbitrator, not the court, to decide.

ArbitrationLabor LawCollective BargainingPlant ClosureInjunctionGrievance ProcedureContract DurationFederal PreemptionJudicial DeferenceArbitrability
References
9
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 04454 [219 AD3d 22]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2023

Matter of Afra

Attorney Sam Afra faced four charges of professional misconduct, primarily involving escrow-related issues. The Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District filed a petition alleging misappropriation of funds, maintenance of negative escrow account balances, and payment of personal/business expenses from the escrow account. A Special Referee sustained all four charges. The Court considered mitigating factors like personal hardships and remedial actions, but also aggravating factors such as repeated negative balances and unauthorized withdrawals. Ultimately, the Court ordered Sam Afra's suspension from the practice of law for a period of six months, commencing September 29, 2023.

Professional MisconductEscrow Account ViolationsMisappropriation of FundsAttorney SuspensionFiduciary DutyRules of Professional ConductDisciplinary ActionGrievance CommitteeEthical ViolationFinancial Mismanagement
References
1
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04638 [197 AD3d 800]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 05, 2021

Matter of McMillian v. Krygier

Petitioner, an incarcerated person, challenged a reduction in his pay rate by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) after refusing to participate in recommended programming. His grievance was denied by the facility Superintendent and his subsequent appeal to the Central Office Review Committee (CORC) remained undecided for over eight months. Petitioner then initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which the Supreme Court dismissed on the merits. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment. The court found that exhaustion of administrative remedies was excused due to both futility and the presence of pure questions of law, concluding that DOCCS's policies linking pay reduction to program refusal were within its statutory authority and were properly applied.

Inmate RightsPrison AdministrationAdministrative RemediesExhaustion DoctrineCPLR Article 78 ReviewNew York State LawCorrectional FacilitiesDue ProcessGrievance ProceduresJudicial Review
References
30
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 04524 [186 AD3d 23]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 2020

Matter of Doris

The Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) initiated a disciplinary proceeding against attorney Lawrence A. Doris following client complaints of professional misconduct, including failure to file a personal injury case and lack of communication. Despite numerous attempts by the AGC through letters, emails, and a judicial subpoena, Mr. Doris failed to respond to the allegations or appear for a deposition. The AGC subsequently moved for his immediate suspension from the practice of law due to his willful noncompliance and failure to cooperate with their investigation. The Appellate Division, First Department, granted the AGC's motion, finding that Mr. Doris's conduct warranted immediate suspension. This decision underscores the importance of attorney cooperation in disciplinary matters and protection of the public interest.

Attorney disciplineProfessional misconductNoncooperation with investigationImmediate suspensionGrievance CommitteeClient complaintFailure to communicateJudicial subpoenaPublic interest threatAppellate Division
References
6
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 03468 [161 AD3d 132]
Regular Panel Decision
May 10, 2018

Matter of Machado

This case involves reciprocal discipline against attorney Esmeralda Machado. The Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department sought to discipline Machado based on a New Jersey Supreme Court order permanently barring her from appearing pro hac vice due to unauthorized practice of law, dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. Machado had repeatedly failed to pay required fees, continued to practice in New Jersey despite her pro hac vice admission terminating, misused another attorney's letterhead, and made false statements in a divorce proceeding. The New York Appellate Division, First Department, granted the motion for reciprocal discipline, suspending Machado from the practice of law in New York for two years, effective June 11, 2018. The court found her misconduct in New Jersey would also constitute misconduct in New York.

Attorney MisconductUnauthorized Practice of LawReciprocal DisciplineProfessional EthicsSuspensionNew Jersey Disciplinary ProceedingsFalse StatementsFraudDishonestyAppellate Division First Department
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 323 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