Skip to content

News & Knowledge

Partners are 4-0 at the Court of Appeals

Case Study

Partners are 4-0 at the Court of Appeals

April 01, 2011

Two partners in the Labor and Employment Practice Group are a combined 4-0 at the Court of Appeals, each time obtaining a reversal of the Appellate Division – Fourth Department:

  1. In the matter of the Arbitration between the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association and the City of Buffalo, 4 N.Y.3d 660; 830 N.E.2d 308; 797 N.Y.S.2d 410 (2005):  vacating an arbitration award that allowed the Police Commissioner to select 1 of the top three officers as allowed under section 61 of the Civil Service Law.
  2. In the matter of Chautauqua County v. Civil Service Employees Association, 8 N.Y. 3d, 513 (2007), represented Chautauqua County in obtaining a reversal of a Fourth Department Order refusing a stay of arbitration as the Court of Appeals ruled that section 80 of the Civil Service Law could not be waived in a collective bargaining agreement.
  3. In the matter of County of Erie and the Erie County Sheriff v. the New York Public Employment Relations Board, 12 N.Y. 3d 72 (2009), successfully represented the County and the Sheriff in obtaining a reversal of a Fourth department and PERB ruling that the County violated the Taylor Law when it refused to bargain over the transfer and housing of prisoners.
  4. In the Matter of Meegan v. Brown, Foley v. Brown, and BTF v. Buffalo BOE, 2011 Court of Appeals, No. 37 (March 29, 2011), reversing the determination of the lower Court that employees should receive all of the wage and step increases at the end of the wage freeze.
We have also successfully represented the City in three major wage freeze litigations:
  1. Foley v. Masiello, 38 A.D.3d 1201 (4th Dept 2007) (original firefighter wage freeze challenge)
  2. Meegan v. Masiello, 21 A.D.3d 1266 (4th Dept 2005) (original PBA wage freeze challenge)
  3. Ruling in In the Matter of Meegan v. Brown, Foley v. Brown, and BTF v. Buffalo BOE, 2011 Court of Appeals, No. 37 (March 29, 2011), reversing the determination of the lower Court that employees should receive all of the wage and step increases at the end of the wage freeze.