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. 2023 NY Slip Op 03275 [217 AD3d 1168]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 15, 2023

Matter of Jazmyne VV.

This case involves an appeal by Jazmyne VV. from an order of the Family Court of Cortland County, which adjudicated her a Person in Need of Supervision (PINS). The principal of Randall Middle School, Juliann Quinn, filed the PINS petition due to Jazmyne's habitual truancy and disobedient behavior. Jazmyne argued that the PINS petition was jurisdictionally defective, citing the absence of a manifestation determination hearing and the Probation Department's failure to provide its case record to Family Court. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that a manifestation determination hearing was not warranted as Jazmyne was not a special education student at the time, the record was made available to the court, and the petition adequately detailed diversion efforts.

PINSTruancySpecial Education Student StatusManifestation Determination HearingDiversion ServicesFamily Court Act Article 7Appellate ReviewJurisdictional DefectsCortland CountySchool Discipline
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mount Sinai Union Free School District v. Board of Education Port Jefferson Public Schools

Mount Sinai and Port Jefferson School Districts had a long-standing contract for Mt. Sinai to send its high school students to Port Jefferson. Following a deterioration of relations and an increase in Mt. Sinai's student population, Mt. Sinai decided to build its own high school. New York Education Law § 3014-c was enacted, requiring sending districts to consider teachers from receiving districts as their own employees. Mt. Sinai challenged this statute, alleging various constitutional violations. The court dismissed claims by teacher, parent/student, and taxpayer plaintiffs for lack of standing, and then dismissed the remaining Contract Clause claim by Mt. Sinai, granting summary judgment to the defendants.

School DistrictsTeacher TenureEducation LawContract ClauseDue ProcessEqual ProtectionStandingAbstention DoctrineSummary JudgmentFederal Civil Procedure
References
17
Case No. C-5672, E-2429, C-5878
Regular Panel Decision

Buffalo United Charter School v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

Petitioners, consisting of Buffalo United Charter School, Brooklyn Excelsior Charter School, and National Heritage Academies, Inc., initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge and annul a February 14, 2011 decision by the New York Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). The PERB decision asserted jurisdiction over the charter schools, rejected National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preemption claims, and determined that assistant principals were neither managerial nor confidential employees. Petitioners contended that PERB lacked jurisdiction due to its joint public-private employment doctrine, that the NLRA preempted PERB's authority, and that PERB erroneously found the assistant principals lacked managerial or confidential status. They also argued the PERB decision unconstitutionally impaired their contractual rights. The court largely upheld PERB's jurisdiction, ruling that the Charter Schools Act superseded PERB's joint public-private employment doctrine and denying the NLRA preemption claim. However, the court annulled PERB's determination regarding the managerial and confidential status of assistant principals at Brooklyn Excelsior Charter School, reinstating the Administrative Law Judge's original finding on that specific issue.

Charter SchoolsPublic Employment Relations Board (PERB)Taylor LawNational Labor Relations Act (NLRA)JurisdictionJoint Public-Private Employment DoctrineManagerial EmployeesConfidential EmployeesCollective BargainingCPLR Article 78
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lavigne v. Peru Central School District

The claimant, a teaching assistant for Peru Central School District, was injured after a fall in 2003. She subsequently filed for workers' compensation benefits in 2005, which was beyond the two-year statutory period. A workers' compensation law judge initially found that the employer's provision of medical treatment waived the filing requirement. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed this decision and disallowed the claim as untimely. The court affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that the first aid provided by the principal and school nurse was not an acknowledgment of employer liability, and therefore, did not waive the time bar under Workers’ Compensation Law § 28.

Workers' Compensation LawTimeliness of ClaimAdvance Payment of CompensationMedical Treatment WaiverEmployer LiabilityFirst AidStatute of LimitationsBoard ReviewAffirmed DecisionClaim Disallowance
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Loucks v. Board of Education of Middle County School District No. 11

Margaret R. Loucks, a former librarian for the Middle County School District No. 11, filed a lawsuit alleging age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). She claimed that the school district's early retirement incentive plan discriminated against her because employees who retired at age 55 received 100% health insurance benefits, while she, having retired at 58, received only 50%. Loucks contended that the plan, which based eligibility on age 55, arbitrarily discriminated. The U.S. District Court, presided over by Judge Joseph F. Bianco, examined cross-motions for summary judgment. The Court found the retirement incentive plan to be permissible under the ADEA's safe harbor provision, referencing Auerbach v. Board of Education, which upheld similar early retirement plans. The Court concluded that the plan was voluntary, offered for a reasonable period, and did not arbitrarily discriminate on the basis of age by providing the same benefits to all eligible participants at 55. Consequently, the defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted, the plaintiff's motion was denied, and the complaint was dismissed.

Age DiscriminationEarly Retirement IncentiveADEASummary JudgmentCollective Bargaining AgreementSafe Harbor ProvisionHealth Insurance BenefitsEmployment LawFederal CourtDiscrimination Law
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Diana G-D v. Bedford Central School District

Diana G-D, a third-grader, was allegedly sexually abused by her stepfather, Cesar Joel Sagastume Morales, between December 2005 and August 2006. Her mother, Ann D., learned of the abuse in August 2006 and reported it to the police, leading to Sagastume Morales's eventual conviction. Diana G-D, through her mother, sued the Bedford Central School District, principal Victoria Graboski, and school psychologist Kelly Cieslinski-Schleuter for negligence in failing to report suspected abuse as required by Social Services Law § 413. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing they had no duty to report based on the available information and that any failure was not 'knowing and willful.' The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, finding no 'reasonable cause' to suspect abuse that would trigger a mandatory reporting duty.

Child abuseSexual abuseNegligenceSocial Services LawMandatory reportingSchool liabilitySummary judgmentReasonable causeKnowing and willful failureQualified immunity
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sandiford v. City of New York Department of Education

This is a dissenting opinion concerning a school aide terminated by the New York City Department of Education (DOE) for alleged inappropriate conduct with a 16-year-old student. The plaintiff, a lesbian, claimed discrimination based on sexual orientation and retaliation for complaining about the principal. The dissent argues that the plaintiff's failure to appeal the grievance decision, which substantiated her misconduct, precludes relitigation of the facts. It asserts that the principal's decision to terminate was based on legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons supported by the DOE's investigation and recommendation. Furthermore, the dissent concludes that the retaliation claim fails because the adverse employment action predated the plaintiff's complaints. The dissenting judge would therefore modify the trial court's decision to dismiss the plaintiff's discrimination claim and affirm the dismissal of retaliation and libel claims.

DiscriminationSexual OrientationRetaliationPublic SchoolEmployee TerminationMisconductGrievanceCollateral EstoppelSummary JudgmentAppellate Review
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 19, 2011

Dietz v. Board of Education of Rochester City School District

Petitioner commenced a CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking reinstatement of his employment with the Rochester City School District after his position as a "school instructor/transition counselor" was abolished. He contended he was entitled to seniority rights within the "special subject tenure area" of school social worker under 8 NYCRR 30-1.8 (b) (9) and Education Law § 2585 (3), asserting he was not the least senior person in that tenure area. The Supreme Court denied the petition, and the appellate court affirmed. The collective bargaining agreement between the District and the union specified that layoffs for "school instructors" would occur within distinct categories, not tenure areas, and that school instructors could not displace teachers. By accepting employment as a school instructor and participating in the CBA, the petitioner was deemed to have waived any seniority rights in the school social worker tenure area.

Employment LawSeniority RightsCollective Bargaining AgreementSchool InstructorSchool Social WorkerTenure AreaCPLR Article 78 ProceedingJudicial ReviewWaiver of RightsWorkforce Reduction
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2006

Lawrence Teachers Ass'n v. Lawrence Public Schools

This case concerns an appeal by the Lawrence Teachers Association (petitioner) challenging the denial of their petition to confirm an arbitration award. The arbitration award mandated Lawrence Public Schools (respondent) to designate members of the petitioner’s bargaining unit to provide special education services outside the school district's geographical boundaries. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, denied the petition, concluding the award was unenforceable. The appellate court affirmed this decision, ruling that the arbitration award violated public policy as it contravened Education Law former § 3602-c (2). This statute required the school district to contract with the school district where the nonpublic school attended by the pupil was located for such services. The court emphasized that an arbitrator's award cannot stand if it is contrary to well-defined statutory law and public policy.

Arbitration AwardPublic PolicyEducation LawSpecial Education ServicesCollective BargainingStipulationStatutory ViolationAppellate ReviewSchool District ObligationsLabor Dispute
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of Westmoreland Central School District & Westmoreland Teachers Ass'n

The petitioner, Westmoreland Central School District, sought to vacate an arbitration award and stay further arbitration proceedings. The dispute stemmed from grievances filed by the respondent, the collective bargaining agent for teachers, alleging violations of class size and teaching load provisions in their agreement for the 1974-1977 school year, specifically during the 1975-1976 school year. The arbitrator found violations but, due to the hearing concluding after the 1975-1976 school year, granted a prospective remedy, retaining jurisdiction to resolve class sizes and workloads for the 1976-1977 school year if the parties failed to agree. The petitioner argued that the arbitrator exceeded his powers by retaining jurisdiction over future disputes. The court affirmed the lower court's order, holding that the arbitrator acted within his broad authority to fashion a just and flexible remedy, which was not irrational or in contravention of the collective bargaining agreement.

Arbitration LawPublic Sector Labor LawCollective BargainingArbitrator's AuthorityScope of ArbitrationJudicial Review of ArbitrationGrievance ProceduresClass Size DisputesTeacher WorkloadEquitable Relief
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 1,620 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