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

Telephone Employees Organization, Local 1100, Communications Workers of America v. Woods

This case concerns a plaintiff union, Telephone Employees Organization, Local 1100, Communications Workers of America, attempting to convert a disciplinary financial sanction of $4,939.20 into a judgment against defendant John Woods. The sanction was imposed for Woods crossing a picket line during a strike, violating the union's constitution. Woods defended by claiming he was not a member of the union at the time. The court first determined it had jurisdiction over the nonmembership defense, rejecting the union's preemption argument. Subsequently, the court found that the plaintiff union failed to demonstrate Woods was formally admitted to membership in Local 1100 as required by its constitution and bylaws, lacking proof of an application or initiation fee payment. Consequently, as a nonmember, Woods was not bound by the union's rules prohibiting picket line crossing, rendering the fine unenforceable. The court dismissed the union's complaint and the defendant's counterclaim.

Union Disciplinary ActionPicket Line ViolationUnion Membership DisputeNLRA PreemptionState Court JurisdictionUnion ConstitutionContract EnforcementLabor LawUnion FinesResignation from Union
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 12, 2007

In Re Adelphia Communications Corp.

The case concerns Debtor Adelphia Communications Corp.'s objection to a $44.7 million claim by Lucent Technologies, Inc. Lucent sought to hold Adelphia liable for debts of Devon Mobile Communications, L.P. under Delaware's Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, specifically Section 17-303, alleging de facto general partnership liability. Adelphia argued Lucent's actual knowledge of its limited partner status should defeat the claim. The Court ruled that Section 17-303(a) prioritizes the limited partner's conduct in determining a third party's reasonable belief, making the third party's actual knowledge of limited partner status irrelevant. Citing material factual disputes regarding Adelphia's conduct, the Court denied Adelphia's motion for summary judgment on Lucent's Section 17-303, alter ego, and other equitable claims, scheduling the Section 17-303 claim for the first stage of trial.

Limited Partnership LiabilitySummary Judgment MotionDelaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership ActSection 17-303De Facto General PartnerPartnership ControlVeil PiercingEquitable RemediesBreach of Contract ClaimBankruptcy Proceedings
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Members for a Democratic Union v. Local 1101, Communications Workers

Plaintiffs, Members for a Democratic Union (MDU) and individual members, sought mandatory injunctive relief to compel defendants, Local 1101, Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, and its officers, to publish an advertisement promoting a 'Defense Fund' in the union's newspaper, 'The Generator'. They argued this right under section 101(a)(2) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. The defendants maintained a policy of not accepting paid advertisements, only publishing free notices for union member benefits, and argued this policy was reasonable and consistently applied. The court distinguished the case from previous rulings, noting that 'The Generator' had not 'opened the forum' to commercial speech or taken a stance on the Defense Fund issue. The court also noted that plaintiffs had other viable communication channels. Ultimately, the court found the defendants' policy to be reasonable and granted their motion for summary judgment, denying the plaintiffs' motion and dismissing the action.

Labor LawUnion DemocracyFreedom of SpeechLabor-Management Reporting and Disclosure ActSummary JudgmentUnion NewspaperAdvertising PolicyInjunctive ReliefFirst AmendmentInternal Union Affairs
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

LIN Television Corp. v. National Ass'n of Broadcast Employees & Technicians—Communications Workers

Plaintiff LIN Television Corporation sought to vacate a labor arbitration award that reinstated employee Timothy Flynn after his termination for making threats. Defendants, National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians—Communications Workers of America, counter-claimed to enforce the award. The arbitration found no "just cause" for termination, converting it to a suspension and mandating a positive psychiatric evaluation for Flynn's return. The U.S. District Court, reviewing cross-motions for summary judgment, confirmed the arbitration award. The court ruled that the award drew its essence from the collective bargaining agreement and did not violate public policy regarding workplace safety, thereby denying the plaintiff's motion and granting the defendants' motion.

Labor DisputeArbitration AwardVacaturEnforcementWorkplace SafetyCollective Bargaining AgreementJust CauseEmployee TerminationMental Health EvaluationFederal Court Review
References
26
Case No. ADJ2001631 (LAO 0876091)
Regular
Oct 01, 2010

SALVADOR AGUAYO, JR. vs. AMERICAN GOLF CORPORATION, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address an attorney's fee award of $4,500.00. This fee was awarded for services related to alleged prohibited ex parte communications with Qualified Medical Evaluators (QMEs), as per Labor Code section 4062.3. The Board rescinded the award, finding no explicit determination of prohibited communication occurred as the prior WCJ's orders were voided. The matter was returned to the trial level to first determine if prohibited ex parte communication occurred, and if so, to award fees based on incurred costs and attorney fees for related discovery.

Salvador Aguayo Jr.American Golf CorporationArch Insurance CompanyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardreconsiderationFindings and Awardattorney's feeprohibited communicationsQualified Medical EvaluatorsQME
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sharpe v. MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC.

Byron Sharpe, an African-American former employee of MCI Communications Services, Inc., filed a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination, retaliation, and a racially hostile work environment after his employment was terminated as part of a Reduction in Force in March 2006. Sharpe had previously complained about his direct manager's confrontational style, leading to the manager's reassignment. The court granted MCI's motion for summary judgment, finding that Sharpe failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claims. Specifically, the court concluded that no reasonable jury could find that Sharpe was subjected to a hostile work environment due to his race, nor that his termination was motivated by race or in retaliation for his complaints. The court also dismissed his claims under State and City Human Rights Laws.

Employment DiscriminationRacial DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary Judgment MotionTitle VII Civil Rights ActNew York Human Rights LawWorkplace LayoffPretextDiscriminatory Intent
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Communication Workers of America v. Town of Greece

The Communication Workers of America, Local 1170 (Union) appealed an order that partially vacated an arbitration award concerning the demotion of a Town of Greece police sergeant. The arbitrator had sustained disciplinary charges but reduced a permanent demotion to one year, finding the original penalty unreasonable. The appellate court reversed the Supreme Court's order, agreeing with the Union that the arbitrator acted within his broad discretion and authority under the collective bargaining agreement. The court reiterated that an arbitrator's award can only be vacated if it violates strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds specific limitations. Finding no such exceeding of authority, the appellate court granted the Union's petition to confirm the arbitration award and denied the Town's cross-petition.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementDemotionDisciplinary ActionArbitrator AuthorityJudicial ReviewLabor DisputeAppellate CourtMonroe CountyCPLR Article 75
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Havas v. Communications Workers of America

The plaintiffs, employees of New York Telephone Company, initiated an action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, challenging the use of their agency fees by various labor organizations, including the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL/CIO), for purposes unrelated to collective bargaining. They alleged that the CWA commingled funds and made unauthorized expenditures, extending liability to the AFL/CIO and its affiliates under trust and conspiracy theories. The court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants AFL/CIO and AFL/CIO C.O.P.E., rejecting the plaintiffs' arguments that a constructive trust should be imposed or that a class-based discriminatory animus, necessary for a 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) conspiracy claim, was present. Additionally, the court addressed several discovery motions, issuing partial orders regarding interrogatories and requests to produce, and limiting the scope of deposition questions. This decision clarified the extent of liability for affiliated labor organizations concerning agency fee expenditures and set boundaries for discovery in this complex labor dispute.

Collective BargainingAgency FeesLabor LawSummary JudgmentDiscovery MotionsDuty of Fair RepresentationConspiracy ClaimsNational Labor Relations ActRailway Labor ActDeclaratory Relief
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mango v. Communications Workers, Local 1105

The plaintiffs, members of the Communications Workers of America, Local 1105, filed an action to compel the Union to hold a special meeting regarding election procedures, including the use of the American Arbitration Association and candidate-designated election committee members. After an initial motion for injunctive relief led the Union to concede some demands, a second motion concerning membership lists was denied due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Subsequently, the plaintiffs moved for an award of attorney's fees under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 412. The Court, presided over by District Judge Sweet, granted the motion, finding the plaintiffs to be a prevailing party. However, specific portions of the requested fees were reduced due to reasons such as unreasonableness of hours spent on certain tasks (e.g., preparing subpoenas) and insufficient descriptions of services rendered in the time records.

Attorney's FeesLabor-Management Reporting and Disclosure ActUnion ElectionsInjunctive ReliefPrevailing PartyReasonableness of FeesDocumentation of ServicesUnion Membership ListsDue ProcessLabor Law
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 23, 2008

Finkel v. Omega Communication Services, Inc.

Plaintiff Gerald Finkel, Chairman of the Joint Industry Board of the Electrical Industry, sued Omega Communication Services, Inc. for delinquent contributions to employee benefit plans under ERISA and LMRA. Omega failed to appear, leading to a default judgment motion. Magistrate Judge Azrack recommended granting default judgment, awarding $122,846.59 to the plaintiff, including unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs. District Judge John Gleeson adopted this Report and Recommendation, directing the clerk to enter judgment in accordance with the recommendation. The case details calculations for various benefit plans and addresses the reasonableness of attorney fees and costs.

ERISALMRADefault JudgmentDelinquent ContributionsEmployee BenefitsMulti-employer PlanAttorneys FeesLiquidated DamagesPrejudgment InterestCollective Bargaining Agreement
References
19
Showing 1-10 of 1,065 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