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
Jul 24, 2015

In re the Arbitration between Bukowski

Petitioner Michael Bukowski, a correction officer, was dismissed from service after he kicked an inmate, causing serious injuries, and subsequently lied about the incident. An arbitrator sustained the charges but reduced the penalty to a 120-day suspension, which respondent Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) refused to comply with. The Supreme Court confirmed the misconduct findings but vacated the reduced penalty, remitting the matter for a new penalty. On appeal, the higher court affirmed, ruling that the arbitrator's reduced penalty violated strong public policy against inmate abuse and officer dishonesty, as Bukowski not only used excessive force but also repeatedly lied to conceal his actions. The case was remitted for the imposition of an appropriate penalty, taking into account the public policy implications of the officer's misconduct and deceit.

Corporal PunishmentExcessive ForceInmate AbuseArbitration AwardPublic Policy ExceptionCorrectional Officer MisconductDishonestyPenalty MitigationJudicial ReviewCollective Bargaining Agreement
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Abbondanzo

The claimant appealed a decision from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which ruled he was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct. The misconduct stemmed from a fight with a co-worker during business hours. The court found substantial evidence supported the Board's decision, noting that fighting with a co-worker constitutes disqualifying misconduct, especially given the claimant's prior admonishment for unprofessional conduct. The decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was affirmed.

Unemployment InsuranceMisconductWorkplace FightingDisqualificationEmployment TerminationAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidencePrior Admonishment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Connolly v. Williams

The court unanimously confirmed the determination of the Deputy Chief Administrative Judge, which found the petitioner guilty of misconduct and terminated his employment as a court officer. The misconduct involved unwanted physical contact and sexually suggestive remarks directed at three female co-workers. The petition challenging this determination was denied, and the proceeding brought under CPLR article 78 was dismissed. The court found substantial evidence supported the misconduct findings and that the penalty of dismissal was not unduly harsh. It also ruled that the petitioner's due process rights were not violated by the hearing officer's in camera review of investigative files or the denial of an adjournment to subpoena additional witnesses.

MisconductEmployment TerminationCourt OfficerSexual HarassmentDue ProcessDisciplinary ActionAppellate ReviewCPLR Article 78Substantial EvidenceFairness of Penalty
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 04, 1981

Milburn v. Mcniff

This case concerns an appeal challenging the constitutionality of the New York State Department of Correctional Services' inmate correspondence program. The plaintiff, an inmate named Louis Milburn, contended that his First Amendment rights were violated when his letters to the Poughkeepsie Journal were returned, allegedly due to censorship under Departmental Directive 4422. The Supreme Court, Dutchess County, initially issued an order restricting the department from imposing greater restrictions on news media correspondence. However, the appellate court, finding a lack of factual findings and confusion regarding prior remittal instructions, again remitted the matter for a comprehensive factual hearing. This hearing is to determine the reasons for the letters' return, examine the department's directives on mail inspection and censorship, and balance governmental interests against inmates' constitutional rights, with the appeal held in abeyance.

Inmate CorrespondenceCensorshipFirst AmendmentConstitutional RightsCorrectional FacilitiesNews MediaDue ProcessAdministrative DirectivesDeclaratory JudgmentRemittal
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Belmar

Claimant, a school guard for the New York City Board of Education, was terminated after failing to disclose an arrest and conviction for third-degree criminal possession of a weapon. The incident occurred during nonworking hours, but the Administrative Law Judge and the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board determined that his conduct constituted misconduct directly related to his position and posed a safety risk to students, thus disqualifying him from benefits. The appellate court affirmed the decision, ruling that misconduct affecting integrity, even if off-duty, bears a relationship to employment under Labor Law § 593 (4). The court also held that a certificate of relief from civil disabilities does not exempt an individual from a finding of ineligibility for unemployment benefits due to misconduct.

MisconductUnemployment BenefitsCriminal ConvictionSchool GuardWeapon PossessionOff-Duty ConductCertificate of ReliefCivil DisabilitiesBoard of EducationPersonnel Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Meyerovich

The claimant, a maintenance technician, was discharged for misconduct after his manager observed him loafing on the job and he subsequently filed a workers' compensation claim for a back injury, which the employer alleged was false. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualified the claimant from receiving benefits due to misconduct, a decision it adhered to upon reconsideration. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence in the manager's testimony that she did not observe the claimant using a shovel during her observation, thus supporting the finding of a false workers' compensation claim and misconduct. The court also noted that conflicting testimony presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve and that prior Workers' Compensation Board decisions were not final regarding the accidental injury issue, thus lacking collateral estoppel effect.

MisconductUnemployment Insurance BenefitsFalse Workers' Compensation ClaimSubstantial EvidenceCredibility IssueDischarge from EmploymentLoafingProbationAppeal Board DecisionAffirmation
References
6
Case No. 03-07-00067-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 27, 2008

Luis Lagaite, Jr. v. Brad Livingston, David Doughty, Keith Clendennen, Tracy Allen, Joseph M. Smith and Kelli Ward

Luis Lagaite, Jr., an inmate, appealed the dismissal of his suit against employees of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Lagaite originally filed a petition for writ of mandamus in Travis County, alleging retaliation for reporting official misconduct and seeking reinstatement as a breakfast cook, among other reliefs. The TDCJ employees filed a motion to dismiss under Chapter 14 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which allows dismissal of inmate lawsuits deemed frivolous or malicious, and the trial court granted this motion. The trial court dismissed Lagaite's suit for failing to comply with Section 14.004, which requires an inmate to file a declaration of previous lawsuits. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order of dismissal, finding no abuse of discretion as Lagaite failed to provide the required declaration.

Inmate litigationpro se appealChapter 14 dismissalCivil Practice and Remedies Codefrivolous lawsuitadministrative remediesretaliationTexas Department of Criminal Justiceappellate reviewabuse of discretion
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kagha v. Carter

Petitioner, a hospital courier, was discharged by respondent Westchester County Medical Center following sustained charges of misconduct, including 72 specifications of lateness, unauthorized absences, and failure to follow reporting procedures. Petitioner challenged the termination, asserting a violation of Workers' Compensation Law § 120 due to a reopened workers' compensation case and arguing a doctor's note justified his absences. The court rejected the Workers' Compensation claim, noting the Workers' Compensation Board's exclusive jurisdiction, and dismissed the doctor's note argument, emphasizing the employer's established call-in policy and petitioner's history of time and leave abuses. The court ultimately confirmed the determination, finding the penalty of discharge proportionate to the pattern of misconduct.

MisconductTermination of EmploymentCPLR Article 78Civil Service Law § 75Workers' Compensation Law § 120Time and Leave AbusesUnauthorized AbsenceCall-in PolicyJudicial ReviewPenalty Proportionality
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Shapiro

The claimant appealed a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that disqualified him from receiving benefits due to misconduct. This was the claimant's second application for reconsideration, seeking to submit new evidence regarding who closed the register early. The court affirmed the Board's denial of the second application, noting the claimant's failure to provide new evidence and his prior testimony admitting to the misconduct. The court found no abuse of discretion in the Board's decision.

Unemployment InsuranceMisconductAppeal BoardReconsiderationAdministrative LawEvidenceJudicial ReviewEmployment TerminationDue ProcessClaimant Rights
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Tandon

The claimant appealed a decision from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which had disqualified him from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to employment termination caused by misconduct. The record supported the finding that the claimant's discharge stemmed from misconduct, specifically his unauthorized reading of a memorandum regarding his job performance, despite prior warnings about using co-workers' property without permission. The court found that these actions were not inadvertent and were detrimental to the employer's interest. Consequently, the Board's decision was affirmed without costs.

Unemployment InsuranceMisconductJob PerformanceUnauthorized Use of PropertyEmployment TerminationAppeal BoardBenefits DisqualificationAppellate DecisionWorkplace RulesEmployee Conduct
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 1,168 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