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. 04-13-00069-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2014

Tarrant County Democratic Party, Steve Maxwell, in His Official Capacity as Chair of the Tarrant County Democratic Party, Texas Democratic Party And Gilberto Hinojosa, in His Official Capacity as Chair of the Texas Democratic Party v. John Steen, in His Official Capacity as Secretary of State of Texas

This appeal concerns the reimbursement of attorney's fees incurred by the Tarrant County Democratic Party (TCDP), Texas Democratic Party (TDP), and their chairs (Appellants) from the Texas Secretary of State (Appellee). The fees were for defending an election contest lawsuit (the Brimer suit) challenging Wendy Davis’s eligibility as a Democratic candidate for State Senate District 10. The Secretary of State denied reimbursement, arguing the fees were unrelated to the primary election. The appellate court held that Election Code section 173.086(a) waives sovereign immunity and that the Brimer suit fees were

Election LawAttorney's FeesSovereign ImmunityStatutory InterpretationPrimary ElectionElection ContestTexas Election CodeReimbursement ClaimDeclaratory Judgment ActAppellate Procedure
References
33
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 01469
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 28, 2019

Guthorn v. Village of Saranac Lake

In this appeal, Robert Guthorn, an injured project manager, and his wife sued the Village of Saranac Lake alleging Labor Law violations. The Village, acting as a third-party plaintiff, sought contractual indemnification from Kilby & Gannon Construction Services, LLC, Guthorn's employer and a subcontractor. The core legal dispute revolved around the retroactive enforceability of an indemnification clause within a subcontractor agreement (AIA agreement) that was executed by Kilby & Gannon after Guthorn's accident but was backdated to an earlier date. Supreme Court denied the Village's cross-motion for summary judgment, citing a question of fact regarding whether the parties intended the agreement to apply retroactively. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed this decision, concluding that material issues of fact precluded summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim.

Contractual IndemnificationRetroactive AgreementSummary JudgmentLabor Law ViolationsSubcontractor AgreementThird-Party ActionConstruction AccidentAppellate ReviewQuestion of FactIndemnification Clause
References
10
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 05047
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2024

Cooper v. Bldg 7th St. LLC

This case involves an appeal regarding summary judgment motions on indemnification and breach of contract claims between defendants/third-party plaintiffs BLDG 7th Street, LLC et al. and third-party defendant Global Pest Control, LLC. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order by denying summary judgment to Global on BLDG's contractual indemnification claim, citing an unclear and ambiguous indemnification agreement. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of BLDG's common-law indemnification and contribution claims against Global because plaintiff Dwayne Cooper was not alleged to have sustained a grave injury under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. The dismissal of BLDG's breach of contract claim for failure to procure insurance was also affirmed, as Global provided proof of its policy meeting contractual requirements. Consequently, issues of fact remain concerning the scope of the parties' indemnification agreement.

Contractual IndemnificationCommon-Law IndemnificationSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractFailure to Procure InsuranceThird-Party ClaimsWorkers' Compensation Law § 11Grave InjuryAmbiguity in ContractAppellate Review
References
9
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 04809 [140 AD3d 532]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2016

Masi v. Cassone Trailer & Container Co.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, which denied motions for summary judgment by defendant Cassone Leasing Inc. and third-party defendant LKQ Hunts Point Auto Parts Corp. The case involved Anthony Masi's personal injury claims against various defendants, including Cassone Trailer & Container Co. and Cassone Leasing Inc. The court clarified that a prior settlement agreement under Workers' Compensation Law § 32, entered into by Masi and his employer LKQ, only settled workers' compensation claims and did not release personal injury claims against other defendants. Furthermore, a subsequent broad release agreement between Masi and LKQ released claims solely in favor of LKQ, not extending to other defendants in the personal injury suit. The court did not address whether the release barred third-party actions against LKQ, as that issue was not raised below.

Summary judgmentPersonal injury claimsWorkers' Compensation LawSettlement agreementRelease agreementThird-party actionsAppellate reviewDismissal motionScope of releaseEmployer liability
References
1
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 03642
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 10, 2021

Lorica v. Krug

Plaintiff Joseph Lorica, an employee of third-party defendant G & C Plumbing & Heating Corp., was injured in a fall at a construction site owned by defendant Jeremy Krug and managed by defendant The Krug Group Corp. Lorica and his spouse derivatively commenced an action against Krug and The Krug Group Corp., alleging Labor Law violations. The defendants then filed a third-party action against G & C seeking contractual and common-law indemnification. The Supreme Court dismissed the common-law indemnification claim but partially denied G & C's motion for summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim, finding questions of fact. G & C appealed. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that G & C failed to meet its initial burden on summary judgment due to unresolved questions of fact regarding whether the parties had an indemnification agreement prior to the accident and whether a written agreement signed after the accident was intended to apply retroactively.

Contractual IndemnificationSummary JudgmentRetroactive AgreementWorkers' Compensation Law § 11Labor Law § 240Construction Site InjuryThird-Party ClaimAppellate ReviewHold Harmless AgreementQuestions of Fact
References
11
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 07354 [200 AD3d 1578]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2021

Corter-Longwell v. Juliano

This case concerns an appeal regarding a third-party action for indemnification in a wrongful death lawsuit. Michalla Corter-Longwell, as administratrix of James L. Corter's estate, initiated the original action. Pocono Logistic, Inc. (third-party plaintiff) sued Seneca Meadows, Inc. (third-party defendant) for common-law indemnification. Seneca counterclaimed for contractual indemnification, alleging Pocono breached an agreement by failing to procure insurance naming Seneca as an additional insured. The Supreme Court denied Seneca's motion for summary judgment and granted Pocono's cross-motion, dismissing Seneca's counterclaims. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, found the agreement ambiguous regarding Pocono's obligation to name Seneca as an additional insured. Therefore, it modified the order by denying Pocono's cross-motion and reinstating Seneca's counterclaims, while affirming the denial of Seneca's summary judgment motion.

Contractual IndemnificationInsurance ProcurementAdditional InsuredSummary JudgmentThird-Party BeneficiaryContract InterpretationAmbiguityWrongful DeathBreach of ContractAppellate Review
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York Party Shuttle, LLC v. John Bilello

Appellant New York Party Shuttle, LLC (NYPS) appealed a judgment favoring appellee John Bilello for breaching a 2006 settlement agreement. The trial court found NYPS breached the agreement, awarding Bilello $39,900.04 plus prejudgment interest. NYPS contended it established affirmative defenses of mutual mistake, novation, and repudiation, and that the trial court erred in denying its motion for a continuance. Bilello cross-appealed the denial of attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding NYPS failed to prove its affirmative defenses or that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the continuance. The court also held Bilello waived his cross-point regarding attorney's fees due to failure to file a notice of appeal.

Breach of ContractSettlement AgreementMutual MistakeNovationRepudiationAffirmative DefensesMotion for ContinuanceAttorney's FeesAppellate ReviewTexas Law
References
42
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 02669 [227 AD3d 505]
Regular Panel Decision
May 14, 2024

Noel v. 336 E 95th Realty LLC

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order dismissing a third-party complaint filed by 336 E 95th Realty LLC (Owner) against Champion Elevator Corp. The Owner sought indemnification or contribution from Champion Elevator Corp. under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. The court found that the plaintiff, Keron Noel, did not suffer a "grave injury" as defined by the statute. Furthermore, there was no binding contractual indemnification agreement between the parties. Therefore, the employer, Champion Elevator Corp., was not liable to the third-party plaintiff, and the dismissal of the complaint was proper.

Workers' Compensation LawGrave InjuryIndemnificationContributionThird-Party ComplaintDismissalAppellate DivisionEmployer Liability
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 21, 1998

Santos v. Floral Park Lodge of Free & Accepted Masons

In a personal injury action, third-party defendants appealed from orders denying their motion to dismiss a third-party claim for breach of an agreement to procure insurance. The Supreme Court, Queens County, had initially denied the dismissal. The appellate court dismissed the appeal from the initial order, as it was superseded by a subsequent order made upon reargument. The appellate court affirmed the order made upon reargument, holding that the Omnibus Workers’ Compensation Act of 1996 does not bar a third-party action against an employer for breach of an agreement to procure liability insurance.

Personal InjuryThird-Party ActionWorkers' Compensation LawBreach of Agreement to Procure InsuranceEmployer LiabilityAppealSupreme CourtQueens CountyMotion to DismissStatutory Interpretation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Madeira v. Affordable Housing Foundation, Inc.

This case involves an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff Jose Madeira at a construction site. The plaintiff sued Affordable Housing, the site owner, and Mountain Developers, the general contractor, under New York Labor Law § 240(1) (Scaffold Law). A jury in Phase I found the defendants liable and awarded Jose Madeira $638,671.63. In Phase II, the jury determined that the third-party defendant, Cleidson Silva d/b/a C & L Construction (plaintiff's employer), was 82% liable for the accident, while Mountain and Affordable were each 9% liable based on an indemnification agreement. The court addresses post-trial motions from both third-party defendants (Silva) for a new trial and third-party plaintiffs (Affordable and Mountain) for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, both of which are denied. Key issues included the plaintiff's right to lost earnings as an undocumented worker, the jury's apportionment of fault, and the preclusion of proof regarding lack of insurance.

Scaffold LawLabor Law § 240(1)Indemnification AgreementThird-Party ActionJudgment Notwithstanding the VerdictNew Trial MotionUndocumented Worker RightsLost EarningsImmigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)Apportionment of Fault
References
19
Showing 1-10 of 8,042 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