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

Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America, Ltd. v. Gamez

This case involves an appeal by Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America, Ltd. challenging a trial court's award of approximately $400,000 in guardian ad litem fees and an additional $30,000 in appellate fees. The underlying litigation was a products liability case involving multiple minor plaintiffs, for whom the guardians ad litem were appointed. Goodyear contested the fees, arguing they were excessive, covered work outside the guardians' scope of duties, included work performed after the case settlement, and featured inappropriate billing practices. The appellate court found insufficient evidence to support the reasonableness of the ad litem fees, noting issues like billing for non-essential tasks, duplicate work, and unreasonable time entries (e.g., billing for sleeping or over 24 hours a day). Consequently, the court reversed the award of appellate fees, finding the trial court lacked plenary jurisdiction to modify the judgment. The aggregate ad litem fees portion of the judgment was reversed and remanded for recalculation consistent with the appellate court's opinion.

Guardian Ad LitemAttorney FeesAppellate FeesProducts LiabilityMinor PlaintiffsFee CalculationScope of DutiesExcessive BillingPlenary JurisdictionAbuse of Discretion
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Shelton v. ADS Environmental Services

This is a workers' compensation case on interlocutory appeal, considered a companion to McCall v. National Health Corp. The central issue is the trial court's authority to initiate temporary workers' compensation benefits before a trial. The appellee, William Roger Shelton, an employee of ADS Environmental Services, claimed to have contracted Hepatitis C during his employment. After ADS denied his claim, the trial court ordered ADS to pay Shelton's medical expenses and temporary total disability benefits, finding a likely causal relationship. Following the precedent set in McCall, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's authority to issue such preliminary orders, applying the 'likely to succeed on the merits' standard, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationInterlocutory AppealTemporary BenefitsHepatitis CCausal RelationshipMedical EvidenceTrial Court AuthorityScope of EmploymentTennessee LawPrecedent
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Adoption of J.

The case concerns an adoption proceeding initiated by a same-sex couple. The court addresses whether to appoint a guardian ad litem for the adoptive infant, a practice previously common in same-sex adoptions due to their novelty. Citing Matter of Dana, which affirmed the legality of same-sex and heterosexual unmarried couple adoptions, the court found no legal basis to treat same-sex adoptions differently from those by married couples, where a guardian ad litem is not automatically appointed if statutory requirements and social worker reports are favorable. The court concluded that denying equal treatment could violate federal and state equal protection clauses, deciding against appointing a guardian ad litem unless special circumstances are present.

AdoptionSame-sex coupleGuardian ad litemBest interest of childEqual protectionDomestic Relations LawStatutory interpretationCourt of AppealsSurrogate's CourtFamily Law
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kelley v. Alexander

Selma Kelley and her husband, John Kelley, appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Mrs. Helen C. Alexander, d/b/a Beekman’s Roto-Rooter Sewer Service. Mrs. Kelley had fallen into a hole dug by Alexander's employees on her property. The trial court based its summary judgment on the doctrine of assumed risk, finding the danger of the hole open and obvious to Mrs. Kelley. The Kelleys argued that the 'rescue doctrine' should apply, as Mrs. Kelley was attempting to cover the hole to protect young neighborhood children who frequently played in her yard. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that the 'rescue doctrine' was not timely raised and, furthermore, was inapplicable because no one was in imminent peril at the time Mrs. Kelley fell. A dissenting opinion argued that Mrs. Kelley was acting under a legal duty as a landowner to protect the children, which should preclude the application of the voluntary assumption of risk doctrine.

Assumed RiskVolenti Non Fit InjuriaRescue DoctrineContributory NegligenceSummary Judgment AppealLandowner LiabilityPremises LiabilityOpen and Obvious DangerPersonal InjuryTexas Law
References
20
Case No. 01CV6456 (ADS)(ARL)
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 23, 2002

Arena v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES OF NASSAU

Glen Arena, a pro se plaintiff, filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Department of Social Services of Nassau County, its employees, a Family Court Justice, and attorneys. Arena alleged violations of his due process and equal protection rights stemming from state Family Court proceedings regarding the custody and visitation of his son. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed counts one, two, and three based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the Younger abstention doctrine, citing a lack of federal court jurisdiction to review state court judgments. Additionally, the court granted Judge Richard S. Lawrence absolute judicial immunity and dismissed all claims against him. Claims against defendant Edward Emanuele, a law guardian, were dismissed because he was not a state actor for purposes of Section 1983, and conspiracy allegations against him were found to be vague. The case was closed against most defendants, leaving only Genna Currie.

Civil RightsDue ProcessEqual ProtectionRooker-Feldman DoctrineYounger Abstention DoctrineJudicial ImmunityState ActorFamily LawChild CustodyVisitation Rights
References
69
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tyndall v. Allen & Morris Drilling Co.

William R. Tyndall brought a common law damage suit against Allen and Morris Drilling Company for personal injuries sustained during his employment with Pursley Tong Company, which was engaged by the defendant. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company intervened, seeking recovery of workmen's compensation benefits paid on Tyndall's behalf. Following a jury trial, judgment was entered against Tyndall, who then appealed, asserting that the trial court erred by refusing to submit issues on discovered peril. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no evidence supporting the contention that the defendant's driller actually discovered and realized Tyndall's perilous position in time to avert the accident, a necessary element of the discovered peril doctrine in Texas. Consequently, the trial court's judgment was affirmed.

Personal InjuryDiscovered PerilNegligenceJury TrialAppealWorkers' Compensation BenefitsCommon LawDrilling AccidentProximate CauseTexas Law
References
6
Case No. AD.J9352393, AD.J9352398, AD.J9531390
Regular
Apr 11, 2016

NORMAN WESEMAN vs. CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY, Permissibly Self-Insured, SUPERIOR READY MIX, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendants, City of Cathedral City and Superior Ready Mix. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted this petition. Reconsideration was granted due to statutory time constraints and the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB aims to thoroughly understand the record to issue a just decision. All future correspondence related to the petition must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners, not district offices or e-filed.

PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONWORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDCITY OF CATHEDRAL CITYSUPERIOR READY MIXPERMISSIBLY SELF-INSUREDADJUDICATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMEAMSJUDICIAL ATTORNEY'S FEESCOMPROMISE AND RELEASE AGREEMENTSSTIPULATIONS WITH REQUEST FOR AWARD
References
0
Case No. 90 Civ. 8473, 92 Civ. 3900, 92 Civ. 3901
Regular Panel Decision

Asbestos Litigation

Defendant Raymark Industries, Inc. moved to dismiss, stay, or transfer four of six consolidated asbestos actions. The plaintiffs in these actions (Greff, Moore, McPadden, Strafford, Ciletti, Conway) alleged exposure to asbestos causing diseases like mesothelioma and lung cancer. Raymark based its motion on claims of insufficient service of process, ineffective amendment of complaints to include Raymark as a defendant, and the applicability of abstention doctrine due to parallel state court proceedings for Ciletti and Strafford. The court denied all aspects of Raymark's motion. It found that the plaintiffs had complied with service requirements under New York Business Corporation Law § 307 and that the amendment adding Raymark as a defendant was authorized by a standing Case Management Order for asbestos litigation, overriding the need for specific court leave. Furthermore, the court determined that the conditions for federal abstention under the Colorado River doctrine were not met, upholding the federal court's obligation to exercise its jurisdiction. The court also clarified that Raymark was indeed joined to the Greff and Moore actions through a prior consolidation order, despite Raymark's bankruptcy stay arguments.

Asbestos LitigationMultidistrict LitigationMotion to DismissService of ProcessAmended ComplaintFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)Abstention DoctrineColorado River AbstentionParallel State and Federal ProceedingsJurisdiction
References
20
Case No. AD.J10107792
Regular
Oct 03, 2016

CANDICE ANDERSON vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the finding that an applicant injured her back during a paid meal break while selling burritos on employer premises. The Board found this activity was within the course of employment under the "personal comfort" doctrine, distinguishing it from off-duty recreational activities. Defendant's due process and temporary disability contentions were rejected, as the employer remains liable for all temporary disability caused in part by an industrial injury, regardless of non-industrial conditions. Therefore, the original award of temporary disability benefits was affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryCourse of EmploymentPaid Meal BreakVoluntary Off-Duty ActivityPersonal Comfort DoctrineLabor Code Section 3600Labor Code Section 3600(a)(9)Due Process
References
9
Case No. AD.J9720531, AD.J9720533
Regular
Apr 28, 2016

JULIA HERRERA DE GRADILLA vs. MERCHANTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Julia Herrera De Gradilla's petition for reconsideration. The WCAB found the petition to be untimely, as it was filed over 25 days after the arbitrator's decision was served. California law mandates that petitions for reconsideration must be received by the WCAB within the statutory time limit, and late filings deprive the board of jurisdiction. The WCAB further noted that even if timely, the petition would have been denied on its merits based on the arbitrator's report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingDismissalArbitrator's ReportLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsJurisdictional Time LimitMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. Hagler
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,352 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