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

Myers v. Seneca Niagara Casino

Rachel Myers sued Seneca Niagara Casino, alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) after her termination due to illness. The Casino, an arm of the Seneca Nation of Indians, moved to dismiss based on tribal sovereign immunity, arguing FMLA does not abrogate this immunity and the Nation had not waived it. Plaintiff countered that the Casino's employee manual and a Nation-State Gaming Compact constituted waiver. The Court found no express abrogation by Congress and no clear, unequivocal waiver by the Seneca Nation, distinguishing the cited Compact's limited scope. Consequently, the District Court granted Defendant's motion, dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, also ruling that equitable relief was unavailable.

FMLATribal Sovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1)Second Circuit PrecedentIndian Nations LawWaiver of ImmunityEquitable ReliefEmployment LawGaming Compacts
References
13
Case No. 07-02-0169-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2003

Texas Workers' Compensation Commission v. Texas Workers' Compensation Insurance Fund

The Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (Commission) appealed a summary judgment that relieved the Texas Worker's Compensation Insurance Fund (Insurance Fund) of liability for workers' compensation benefits to Glenn Everett, the real party of interest. The Commission contended that the Texas Workers' Compensation Act abrogates the common law defense of election of remedies and that Everett did not make an election. Everett had previously settled a personal injury suit for $37,500 and later pursued a worker's compensation claim. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the Act does not abrogate the election of remedies defense and that Everett made an informed choice to elect remedies by settling his claim after consulting with attorneys, thus barring his right to workers' compensation benefits.

Workers' CompensationElection of RemediesSummary JudgmentTexas Appellate CourtStatutory InterpretationCommon Law DefenseIndemnificationSettlement AgreementEmployee StatusInsurance Fund Liability
References
18
Case No. T20140324, T20140325, M2017-01114-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 28, 2018

Angela Stevens v. State of Tennessee

Angela Stevens and her daughter Lanesia were injured in an automobile accident with a state employee. They filed a claim with the Claims Commission and were awarded damages for medical expenses, vehicle loss, and pain and suffering. The State of Tennessee appealed the award, contending that the collateral source rule, which prevents defendants from using discounted medical expense rates to reduce liability, was abrogated by Tennessee Code Annotated section 9-8-307(d). The Court of Appeals, referencing its recent decision in Estate of Tolbert v. State of Tennessee and the Supreme Court's ruling in Dedmon v. Steelman, affirmed the Claims Commission's decision, holding that the collateral source rule was not abrogated by the statute for personal injury actions before the Claims Commission. The court emphasized that 'actual damages' are synonymous with 'compensatory damages' and there was no clear legislative intent to deviate from this common law meaning.

Collateral Source RuleActual DamagesCompensatory DamagesState LiabilityPersonal InjuryAutomobile AccidentMedical ExpensesClaims Commission ActStatutory InterpretationCommon Law
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McGinty v. New York

In this action, plaintiffs alleged violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Initially, the court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, but the Second Circuit reversed and remanded the decision. An intervening Supreme Court ruling in *Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents* clarified that the ADEA does not abrogate state sovereign immunity, thus preventing claims against States in federal court. Consequently, the action was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Age DiscriminationEmployment DiscriminationSovereign ImmunityFederal JurisdictionEleventh AmendmentADEAOWBPADismissalSecond CircuitSupreme Court Precedent
References
2
Case No. 08-06-00271-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2008

the University of Texas at El Paso v. Alfredo Herrera

Alfredo Herrera, an employee of the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), suffered and re-injured his elbow, leading to his termination. He sued UTEP for employment discrimination, claiming retaliation for taking leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act's (FMLA) self-care provision. UTEP sought dismissal based on sovereign immunity, but the trial court denied this plea. On interlocutory appeal, the appellate court examined whether Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity under the FMLA's self-care provision, ultimately affirming the trial court's decision.

FMLASovereign ImmunityEleventh AmendmentSelf-Care ProvisionGender DiscriminationEmployment LawRetaliationInterlocutory AppealTexasStatutory Interpretation
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Mills v. New York State Police

Claimant, a State Trooper, sustained injuries after falling on his property while checking on his home construction during a work shift in Genesee County. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found the injuries work-related. However, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, deeming it a noncompensable personal act. The appellate court affirmed the Board's finding, concluding that substantial evidence supported the determination that the claimant's presence at his home was for personal reasons unrelated to his employment, despite testimony that he was not abrogating his duties. The decision emphasizes the distinction between injuries arising from employment and purely personal activities.

Workers' CompensationPersonal ActScope of EmploymentAccidental InjuryState TrooperGenesee CountyAppellate DivisionAffirmationNoncompensable InjuryEmployment Related
References
3
Case No. VNO 400907, VNO 400906
Regular
Jan 24, 2008

JORGE ESCOBEDO vs. WESTLAKE INN RESTAURANT & HOTEL, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, SIERRA INSURANCE GROUP

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves applicant Jorge Escobedo seeking benefits for injuries presumed compensable under Labor Code section 5402. The Appeals Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) decision, finding that the defendant failed to rebut the presumption of injury and that applicant's injuries did not require further medical treatment or result in temporary disability, largely based on the WCJ's adverse credibility finding. A dissenting opinion argued that the WCJ's findings on no treatment or disability improperly abrogated the 5402 presumption and suggested appointing a "regular physician" to resolve conflicting medical opinions.

ReconsiderationRebuttable presumptionCompensabilityLabor Code 5402Medical treatmentTemporary disabilityPermanent disabilityApportionmentAttorney's feesSubstantial evidence
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kolbe v. Tibbetts

This case examines whether collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) conferred a vested right upon plaintiff retirees to maintain the same health insurance coverage they had at retirement. The court held that the contracts establish a vested right to a continuation of the same health coverage until age 70, and that the New York Insurance Moratorium Law does not abrogate these contractual rights. However, due to factual issues regarding the intended scope of the plaintiffs' right, particularly concerning the meaning of 'coverage' (identical versus equivalent benefits and costs), the case is remitted for further factual development to determine if increased co-pays for prescription drugs constitute a breach of contract.

Retiree Health BenefitsCollective Bargaining AgreementsVested RightsContract InterpretationHealth Insurance Co-paysFlexible Spending AccountsInsurance Moratorium LawBreach of ContractSummary JudgmentAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Metropolitan Life Insurance

This case addresses an application to stay arbitration under a collective bargaining agreement. The petitioner company sought to prevent arbitration concerning the termination of one of its agents, a dispute brought forth by the union. The company contended that the union had waived its right to arbitration by engaging in picketing and demonstrations, which the company alleged violated the agreement. However, the court, citing established precedent, ruled that a breach of the agreement by a party does not automatically terminate the agreement or forfeit the right to arbitration, especially when the agreement itself has not been abrogated. The court determined that the union's conduct, while potentially a breach, was not so fundamentally destructive to the agreement as to preclude arbitration. Consequently, the motion to stay arbitration was denied.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementStay of ArbitrationWaiver of ArbitrationUnion DisputeEmployee TerminationBreach of ContractPicketingLabor RelationsJudicial Review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Valley Forge Insurance Co. v. Austin

The court denied a motion for rehearing and withdrew its previous opinion of February 6, 2003, substituting the current opinion. It also denied a petition for review concerning Timothy Austin's claim for workers' compensation benefits against Valley Forge Ins. Co. The court agreed with the court of appeals' conclusion that Austin's claim was not barred by the election-of-remedies doctrine. However, the court explicitly stated that it did not reach the merits of the court of appeals’ holding that Texas Labor Code section 409.009 abrogated the doctrine in workers’ compensation cases where group health insurance is involved, thus leaving this legal question open.

Workers' CompensationElection of RemediesStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewGroup Health InsuranceTexas Labor CodeJudicial ReviewLegal PrecedentInsurance Claims
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 54 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