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 01, 2002

In re the Arbitration between Sheet Metal Workers International Ass'n & Building & Construction Trades Council

This case addresses a jurisdictional dispute between local labor unions regarding work on a construction project. The Supreme Court affirmed an arbitration award, finding both the petitioner and respondent locals were obligated to arbitrate under the New York Plan for Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes. The court dismissed arguments regarding a separate national collective bargaining agreement involving the petitioner international union and employer, deeming it a "stranger" to the New York agreement. Consequently, the lower court's determination confirming the award in favor of the respondent local was unanimously affirmed. The petitioners' other contentions challenging the award were found unavailing.

ArbitrationLabor UnionJurisdictional DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementAward ConfirmationSupreme CourtContractual ObligationLabor LawWork AssignmentDispute Resolution

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 24, 2002

In re the Claim of Miller v. North Syracuse Central School District

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision concerning overlapping workers' compensation awards. The claimant, a food services worker, filed two separate claims: one for occupational disease to her shoulders, leading to a schedule loss of use award, and another for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, which resulted in a temporary total disability award for the period from December 13, 1999, to February 14, 2000. The State Insurance Fund argued that the schedule loss of use award should be suspended for this period to prevent an overlap. Initially, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge disagreed, but the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, ruling in favor of suspending the schedule award. On appeal, the court reversed the Board's decision, clarifying that a schedule award is not allocable to a specific period of disability and therefore does not overlap with a temporary total disability award covering a limited timeframe. The court distinguished this from cases involving permanent disability awards. The matter was remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for recalculation of the claimant’s award.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseTemporary Total DisabilityOverlapping AwardsEarning CapacityOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeShoulder InjuryAppellate ReviewRecalculation of Award

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Howe v. Howe

This case addresses significant issues related to the equitable distribution of a marital estate in a matrimonial action. The plaintiff's New York City Fire Department disability pension and his September 11th Victim Compensation Fund award are at the core of the dispute. The court determined that the separate property interest in the plaintiff's disability pension can be calculated by the pension administrator, even without extensive trial evidence, and modified the judgment to reflect this. Additionally, the court affirmed that the economic loss component of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund award is considered 'compensation for personal injuries' under Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (1) (d) (2), classifying it as the plaintiff's separate property based on legislative intent. The matter was remitted to the Supreme Court for entry of an appropriate qualified domestic relations order.

Equitable DistributionMarital PropertySeparate PropertyDisability PensionPersonal Injury CompensationSeptember 11th Victim Compensation FundDomestic Relations LawNew YorkMatrimonial LawPension Distribution

References

Case No. ADJ4086603 (LAO 0829698) ADJ4469358 (LAO 0829699)

Regular

May 01, 2009

ADA ROZENBLAT vs. CEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEM

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board notice addresses a dispute over attorney's fees and costs awarded as sanctions. The defense seeks $800.50 for opposing a petition for reconsideration, while applicant's counsel, Daniel Escamilla, concedes only $540.00. The Board finds $800.50 reasonable and proposes to award this amount to defense counsel, Pearlman, Borska & Wax, L.L.P. This award is separate from any other sanctions payable to the General Fund.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADA ROZENBLATCEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEMADJ4086603ADJ4469358ATTORNEY'S FEESCOSTSSANCTIONSLABOR CODE § 5813PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

References

Case No. ADJ1666303

Regular

Oct 21, 2011

ALTHEA RUSSELL vs. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES, BROADSPIRE

This case involves a supplemental award of attorney's fees to the applicant's attorneys, Charles Clark and Stuart Barth, following a successful defense against the defendant's petition for writ of review. The Court of Appeal remanded the matter to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) to make this supplemental award under Labor Code § 5801. The WCAB reviewed the fee requests and, after disallowing fees for a separate sanctions motion, awarded Clark $2,800.00 and Barth $1,207.50 for their appellate services.

Labor Code § 5801supplemental attorney's feeswrit of reviewpetition for writ of reviewreasonable feeattorney servicesWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSecuritas Security ServicesBroadspireCourt of Appeal

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Rotating Components, Inc. & District 4, International Union of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO

Petitioner moved to confirm an arbitration award, while Respondent cross-moved to vacate it, alleging imperfect execution and lack of a mutual, final, and definite award. The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement from December 1959, and a supplementary agreement from January 1960, which stipulated the assignment of the main agreement to a local union within 18 months, with arbitration if the assignment failed. The arbitrator issued an interim award on September 21, 1961, instructing the union to assign the agreement within 30 days. Upon the union's failure, the arbitrator, on October 29, 1961, assigned the agreement to a new local union to be formed for the employees of Rotating Components, Inc. The court found the arbitrator's award to be within his express powers and rejected the objection regarding the finality and definiteness of the award. Consequently, the court granted the petitioner's motion to confirm the award and denied the respondent's cross-motion to vacate it.

Arbitration AwardCollective BargainingUnion AssignmentContract DisputeMotion to ConfirmMotion to VacateLabor DisputeJudicial ReviewInterim AwardFinality of Award

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Linger v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.

Claimant sustained permanent partial disabilities from two 1977 accidents and one 1980 accident, leading to separate awards from different employers and their respective insurance carriers. Initially, the claimant received concurrent benefits exceeding the statutory maximum rate. Upon discovering these concurrent payments, a joint hearing was held. An Administrative Law Judge apportioned the award, which was subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board, stating that concurrent awards exceeding the statutory maximum for a permanent partial disability were impermissible. The claimant appealed this decision, arguing for a per-accident application of the statutory maximum. However, the appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, asserting that the Workers' Compensation Law establishes an overall maximum rate for permanent partial disability regardless of the number of accidents or employments.

Permanent Partial DisabilityConcurrent AwardsStatutory MaximumApportionmentMultiple AccidentsWage LossJudicial PrecedentAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation BoardInsurance Carriers

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Filipowicz v. De Laval Separator Co.

This case concerns an appeal by an employer and carrier challenging an award for total disability due to silicosis. It was conceded that the claimant suffered from silicosis and was permanently and totally disabled. Appellants argued that there was no proof of injurious exposure during the claimant's last employment with the employer. However, evidence showed the claimant worked as a trucker in the employer's rubber plant, where he was exposed to talc containing silica. The board found sufficient evidence of a causal relationship between this exposure and the claimant's disability, thus affirming the award.

SilicosisOccupational DiseaseTotal DisabilityInjurious ExposureTalc ExposureFoundry WorkerRubber PlantWorkers' Compensation BoardCausal Relation

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 05, 1956

Gluckstern v. Gluckstern

In this separation case, the Special Term initially granted a decree of separation to the plaintiff wife and awarded her custody of their six-year-old son. The appellate court found it difficult to assess the parents' qualifications solely from the record. It suggested that a thorough investigation by a trained social worker, available through the newly established Special Term, Part XII (Family Part), could help resolve doubts regarding custody. Consequently, the amended judgment of February 17, 1956, was modified, remitting the custody decision back to the trial justice for utilization of these services. Additionally, a motion to amend support and maintenance provisions was also remitted, pending the final custody decision.

SeparationChild CustodyRemittalJudicial ReviewSocial Worker InvestigationFamily LawAppellate DivisionSpecial TermParental FitnessSupport and Maintenance

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jun 30, 1989

Lange v. Sartorius, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, New York County, which affirmed an arbitrators’ award in favor of the petitioner and denied the respondents’ cross-motion to vacate it. The dispute arose from the petitioner's termination of employment, which was submitted to arbitration as per their employment agreements. The arbitrators found that the respondents had not complied with the agreements and rendered a monetary award to the petitioner, considering his sudden departure. The appellate court upheld the lower court's decision, emphasizing that arbitration awards are given deference and are not subject to judicial review for merely erroneous factual findings unless completely irrational. Since the arbitrators' award was not irrational, the Supreme Court's order was affirmed.

Arbitration AwardConfirmation of AwardVacatur of AwardEmployment DisputeJudicial Review of ArbitrationDeference to ArbitratorsIrrational FindingsNew York LawFederal LawAppellate Affirmation

References

Showing 1-10 of 8,212 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

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 01, 2002

In re the Arbitration between Sheet Metal Workers International Ass'n & Building & Construction Trades Council

ArbitrationLabor UnionJurisdictional DisputeCollective Bargaining AgreementAward ConfirmationSupreme CourtContractual ObligationLabor LawWork AssignmentDispute Resolution

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 24, 2002

In re the Claim of Miller v. North Syracuse Central School District

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseTemporary Total DisabilityOverlapping AwardsEarning CapacityOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeShoulder InjuryAppellate ReviewRecalculation of Award

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Howe v. Howe

References

Case No. ADJ4086603 (LAO 0829698) ADJ4469358 (LAO 0829699)

Regular

May 01, 2009

ADA ROZENBLAT vs. CEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEM

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADA ROZENBLATCEDARS SINAI HEALTH SYSTEMADJ4086603ADJ4469358ATTORNEY'S FEESCOSTSSANCTIONSLABOR CODE § 5813PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

References

Case No. ADJ1666303

Regular

Oct 21, 2011

ALTHEA RUSSELL vs. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES, BROADSPIRE

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Rotating Components, Inc. & District 4, International Union of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO

Arbitration AwardCollective BargainingUnion AssignmentContract DisputeMotion to ConfirmMotion to VacateLabor DisputeJudicial ReviewInterim AwardFinality of Award

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Linger v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.

Permanent Partial DisabilityConcurrent AwardsStatutory MaximumApportionmentMultiple AccidentsWage LossJudicial PrecedentAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation BoardInsurance Carriers

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Filipowicz v. De Laval Separator Co.

SilicosisOccupational DiseaseTotal DisabilityInjurious ExposureTalc ExposureFoundry WorkerRubber PlantWorkers' Compensation BoardCausal Relation

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 05, 1956

Gluckstern v. Gluckstern

SeparationChild CustodyRemittalJudicial ReviewSocial Worker InvestigationFamily LawAppellate DivisionSpecial TermParental FitnessSupport and Maintenance

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jun 30, 1989

Lange v. Sartorius, Inc.

Arbitration AwardConfirmation of AwardVacatur of AwardEmployment DisputeJudicial Review of ArbitrationDeference to ArbitratorsIrrational FindingsNew York LawFederal LawAppellate Affirmation

References

Showing 1-10 of 8,212 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.