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

Randall v. Toll

Petitioner, a senior financial secretary at SUNY Stony Brook, was suspended without pay under Civil Service Law section 75 following charges of misappropriation. He challenged the suspension, arguing it violated his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights by denying a pre-suspension hearing. The court evaluated the constitutionality of Civil Service Law section 75(3), which permits temporary suspension without pay pending charge determination. It concluded that the state's interest did not justify postponing a hearing, especially since the petitioner had been reassigned from his sensitive role. Consequently, the court vacated the suspension and ordered the petitioner's immediate reinstatement, emphasizing the necessity of a prior hearing for public employee suspensions.

Due ProcessFourteenth AmendmentCivil Service LawPublic Employee RightsSuspension Without PayPre-Suspension HearingGovernmental InterestProperty RightsReinstatementMisconduct Charges
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Figueroa v. New York Thruway Authority

Petitioner, an Affirmative Action Administrator, faced multiple misconduct charges and subsequent suspensions without pay from respondent. Initial hearings found her guilty of several specifications, leading to a 60-day suspension. Further charges resulted in additional 30-day suspensions. Petitioner challenged these determinations and the legality of the suspensions through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, seeking back pay and new hearings. The court confirmed the guilt findings and penalties for the initial charges but partially granted the petition, directing respondent to conduct hearings for two outstanding sets of charges to resolve the petitioner's claim for back wages.

Public Employment DisciplineMisconduct ChargesSuspension Without PayCivil Service LawCPLR Article 78 ProceedingAdministrative ReviewDue ProcessBack Pay ClaimResignation EffectHearing Rights
References
8
Case No. 2020 NYSlipOp 01424
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 27, 2020

Matter of Spratley (New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision)

Petitioner Wayne Spratley, a correction officer, was suspended without pay and terminated after an off-duty drunken altercation, despite later being acquitted of criminal charges. An arbitrator upheld his termination but granted him full back pay, deeming his suspension retroactively invalid. Spratley sought to confirm this arbitration award, while the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) cross-moved to partially vacate it. The Supreme Court confirmed the award in its entirety. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by awarding back pay, as the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) did not provide for such a retroactive invalidation of an interim suspension. Consequently, the Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, vacating the back pay award, and affirmed the order as modified.

Arbitration AwardPublic Sector EmploymentCollective Bargaining AgreementInterim SuspensionBack Pay DisputeArbitrator's AuthorityDisciplinary ActionCriminal AcquittalCPLR Article 75Appellate Review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Kocsis & New York State Division of Parole

Petitioner Richard Kocsis, a parole officer, was suspended without pay due to misconduct. An arbitrator found him guilty and ruled for a four-month suspension, directing that all salary and benefits beyond this period be returned, except where other income was received. During his suspension, Kocsis received workers' compensation benefits for a work-related injury. The arbitrator clarified that Kocsis should receive full pay minus the workers' compensation award. Respondents opposed this, arguing the arbitrator exceeded his authority by violating the collective bargaining agreement, which mandates leave without pay and workers' compensation benefits for work-related injuries. The Supreme Court vacated the portion of the award granting back pay minus workers' compensation and remitted the matter. The Appellate Division affirmed the vacatur of the award but found the remittal unwarranted, concluding there was no issue for further consideration.

Arbitration AwardWorkers' CompensationBack PayCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrator AuthorityJudicial ReviewPublic EmployeeParole OfficerMisconductAppeal
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hernandez v. County of Sullivan

The petitioner, a civil service employee of Sullivan County, appealed a judgment denying his application for reimbursement of back pay and benefits following a suspension and demotion for an unauthorized leave of absence. The Special Term had limited his relief to the period from September 25 through October 16, 1980. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to back pay for the initial 30-day suspension period because he was found guilty, and Civil Service Law § 75(3) precludes recovery in such cases. The court also noted that the county was not obligated to pay him for any period after October 16, 1980, as he failed to return to work, despite a mistaken representation by the County Attorney.

Civil Service LawSuspension without payDemotionBack payBenefits reimbursementCPLR Article 78Unauthorized leaveGuilty findingAppellate reviewGovernment employee
References
1
Case No. ADJ171587
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

MARCUS VASQUEZ vs. MARION RESIDENCE, FIREMANS FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of an administrative law judge's order suspending Integrated Healthcare Recovery Services (IHRS) from appearing before the board. This suspension stemmed from IHRS's failure to pay a $1,000 sanction previously imposed for missing a lien trial. The WCAB has now issued a notice of intent to suspend IHRS unless the sanction is paid within 20 days, citing IHRS's failure to comply with a final order as good cause. IHRS may avoid suspension by paying the sanction or demonstrating good cause to the WCAB.

Labor Code Section 4907Petition for ReconsiderationSuspension of AppearanceWCABWCJSanction OrderLien TrialFinal OrderFailure to PayHearing Representative
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kemp v. Gunn

The petitioner sought review of a New York City Transit Authority determination from January 2, 1987, which sustained a misconduct charge and terminated their employment. The court granted the petition in part, remitting the matter to the Transit Authority to calculate back pay owed to the petitioner. This was based on Civil Service Law § 75(3), which limits suspension without pay to 30 days, requiring payment for the remainder of the suspension period. In all other respects, the Transit Authority's determination, including the penalty of dismissal, was confirmed, and the proceeding was dismissed on the merits. The court found sufficient evidence to support the misconduct charge, even excluding a disputed transcript, and did not consider the dismissal an abuse of discretion.

MisconductEmployment TerminationBack PayCivil Service LawCPLR Article 78Administrative ReviewPublic EmployeeDue ProcessSuspension without PayRemittal
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State Correctional Officer & Police Benevolent Ass'n v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Elsie Pierre, a correction officer, sustained a work-related injury in May 2004, leading to workers’ compensation leave. Respondent Department of Correctional Services initiated termination proceedings, but a medical evaluation by respondent's designated physician on September 15, 2005, found her unfit for duty. Pierre's physician, Sanford Wert, later cleared her for work on June 12, 2006, a finding supported by a Hearing Officer who recommended reinstatement with retroactive pay. Respondent, however, rejected the full retroactive award, granting pay only from October 12, 2007, arguing that Pierre had not properly exhausted administrative remedies for the earlier date and that an independent evaluation was lacking. Petitioners challenged this limited retroactive pay, but the Court confirmed the respondent's determination, dismissing the petition and upholding the October 12, 2007, start date for back pay.

Workers' Compensation LeaveRetroactive Back PayCivil Service LawAdministrative ReviewFitness for DutyMedical Evaluation DisputeCorrection Officer EmploymentCPLR Article 78 ProceedingJudicial DiscretionAppellate Court Decision
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 342 v. Town of Huntington

The Town of Huntington appealed a judgment that vacated an arbitration award concerning the suspension of Cipriano Roman, a heavy equipment operator. Roman was suspended after his property was cited for code violations, leading to a grievance and arbitration. The arbitrator found just cause for suspension, but the Supreme Court vacated this award, deeming it irrational and exceeding the arbitrator's authority, and ordered Roman's reinstatement with back pay. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, agreeing that an arbitrator's award can be vacated if irrational and concluding that Roman's off-duty conduct was unrelated to his job duties, thus lacking justification for the suspension.

Arbitration VacaturEmployee SuspensionOff-duty MisconductIrrational Arbitration AwardArbitrator Exceeded AuthorityCollective Bargaining AgreementReinstatementBack PayLost BenefitsCPLR Article 75 Proceeding
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Chopay v. Town of Oyster Bay

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, a petitioner appealed an interlocutory judgment from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, after being dismissed from his position as an incinerator plant attendant by the Commissioner of the Department of Public Works of the Town of Oyster Bay. The initial judgment failed to reinstate the petitioner or grant back pay, despite a finding that his termination was based on improper considerations. The appellate court modified the interlocutory judgment, directing the respondents to pay the petitioner his salary from 30 days post-suspension, less any other income. The judgment, as modified, was affirmed, with the court deciding against immediate reinstatement, as ongoing pay was deemed sufficient protection until a new hearing's determination.

CPLR Article 78Civil Service LawWrongful TerminationBack PaySuspension without payAppellate ReviewAdministrative LawDue ProcessGovernment EmploymentJudicial Review
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 1,709 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