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. 05-15-01292-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 23, 2015

in Re: Giant Eagle, Inc.

This document is an Index to the Record for a Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed by Relator Giant Eagle, Inc. in the Fifth Court of Appeals, Dallas, Texas. The mandamus seeks relief from the trial court's denial of Giant Eagle's motion to dismiss based on collateral estoppel or a forum selection clause. The underlying case involves Dickson Perry suing Giant Eagle and other defendants for breach of fiduciary duty and unfair competition, stemming from alleged corporate misconduct and self-dealing after Perry's termination. Giant Eagle argues that a prior federal court decision (Judge Boyle's) established Texas as an improper forum for claims requiring interpretation of Stock Purchase Agreements (SP Agreements), and that the forum selection clause therein mandates litigation in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Perry contends his current claims are new, post-2012 events, distinct from prior patent infringement claims, and do not 'arise out of' the SP Agreements. The trial court denied Giant Eagle's motion to dismiss and its subsequent motion to stay proceedings, leading to this mandamus petition.

MandamusForum Selection ClauseCollateral EstoppelBreach of Fiduciary DutyUnfair CompetitionTexas LawCorporate GovernanceDerivative ActionShareholder DisputeContract Interpretation
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brown v. Aztec Rig Equipment, Inc.

William Brown and his wife, Mary, filed a negligence suit against Aztec Rig Equipment, Inc. (Aztec) and Administaff, Inc. (Administaff) following Mr. Brown's alleged personal injuries on Aztec's premises. The defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting the suit was barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act, which the trial court granted. On appeal, the court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that Administaff and Aztec were co-employers of Mr. Brown for workers' compensation purposes. The court found that Aztec had coverage through Administaff and complied with notice provisions, making the exclusive remedy provision applicable. Therefore, the Browns' negligence suit against both entities was barred.

Summary Judgment AppealExclusive Remedy DefenseCo-Employer LiabilityStaff Leasing ArrangementWorker Injury ClaimsEmployer Immunity TexasNegligence Suit BarredContract ValidityEmployment At WillConstructive Notice Coverage
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2003

Local 8A-28A Welfare and 401 (K) Retirement Funds v. Golden Eagles Architectural Metal Cleaning and Refinishing

The plaintiffs, Local 8A-28A Welfare and 401(k) Retirement Funds, sued defendant Golden Eagles Architectural Metal Cleaning and Refinishing, alleging violations of ERISA Section 515 and a collective bargaining agreement for failing to submit to an audit. Golden Eagles moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, and the requirement for arbitration. The District Court, presided over by Judge Sweet, denied the motion, finding that personal jurisdiction existed over Golden Eagles due to ERISA's nationwide service of process provision, and venue was proper in the Southern District of New York as the Funds are administered there. Furthermore, the court determined that the Local 8A-28A Funds, as independent non-signatory entities, were not bound by the arbitration clause present in the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the employer. Consequently, Golden Eagles' motion to dismiss was denied.

ERISAPersonal JurisdictionVenueArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee BenefitsTrust FundsMotion to DismissNationwide Service of ProcessMinimum Contacts
References
26
Case No. No. 08-17-00227-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2018

Ridge Natural Resources, LLC, Calvin Smajstrla, Christopher Hawa and Wilson Hawa v. Double Eagle Royalty, LP

This case involves an arbitration dispute between two oil companies, Ridge Natural Resources, L.L.C. (appellant) and Double Eagle Royalty, L.P. (appellee), concerning a disputed royalty interest in minerals in Winkler County, Texas. Double Eagle, as successor-in-interest to the original lessors (McDaniels), sued to quiet title, and Ridge moved to compel arbitration based on a clause in a 'Royalty Lease' signed with the McDaniels. The trial court denied Ridge's motion, finding the arbitration clause unconscionable. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, agreeing that the agreement's cap on punitive damages is against public policy and must be severed, but found that Double Eagle failed to provide sufficient evidence to dissolve the arbitration agreement entirely on unconscionability grounds. The case was remanded with instructions to compel arbitration after severing the punitive damages prohibition.

Arbitration AgreementContract EnforceabilityUnconscionabilitySubstantive UnconscionabilityProcedural UnconscionabilityExemplary DamagesPublic PolicySeverability ClauseOil and Gas LeaseMineral Royalty Interest
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson

Ronald Jackson sued Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. for negligence and products liability after being injured by a compound bow. The jury found Golden Eagle defectively marketed the bow but also found Jackson negligent, attributing 45% responsibility to him and awarding approximately $20,000 in damages. Jackson moved for a new trial, alleging juror misconduct and bias, which the trial court denied. The court of appeals reversed, but the Supreme Court of Texas reversed the court of appeals's judgment, holding that Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 327(b) and Texas Rules of Civil Evidence 606(b), which generally prohibit jurors from testifying about deliberations unless "outside influence" is involved, are constitutional. The Court clarified that discussions during a trial break are not "deliberations" and thus not barred, but found Jackson's evidence of juror bias inconclusive. The case was remanded to the court of appeals to consider Jackson’s other points of error.

Products LiabilityJuror MisconductJuror BiasNew TrialAppellate ReviewConstitutional LawDue ProcessTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureTexas Rules of Civil EvidenceOutside Influence Exception
References
39
Case No. No. 1215; No. 1215-A
Regular Panel Decision

Eagle Trucking Co. v. Texas Bitulithic Co.

This case involves consolidated appeals stemming from a collision between a dump truck driven by Johnnie Wesley Guin and a winch truck operated by Robert G. Fitch on a Texas highway. The appellate court addressed issues of negligence per se, comparative negligence, and vicarious liability. The court found Fitch and Eagle Trucking Company negligent as a matter of law for blocking the highway, and reversed and remanded the judgment against Guin and Peden for a new trial on damages and comparative negligence. Additionally, the court affirmed directed verdicts for G & G Construction Company and Texas Bitulithic Company, concluding that Guin was an independent contractor and no master-servant relationship existed for vicarious liability.

Vehicle CollisionNegligence Per SeProximate CauseComparative NegligenceIndependent ContractorVicarious LiabilityMaster-Servant RelationshipStatutory ViolationHighway SafetyPersonal Injury
References
53
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Blanchard v. Eagle Nest Tenancy In Common

Claimant's decedent, a superintendent for Eagle Nest Tenancy In Common, died in an unwitnessed one-car motor vehicle accident on the employer's premises. His widow filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits, arguing his death was causally related to his employment. Both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board affirmed this finding, prompting an appeal by the employer's insurance carrier. The carrier contested that the accident occurred "in the course of employment," despite testimony suggesting the decedent intended to address maintenance issues after returning home. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's amended decision, finding sufficient evidence to support that the accident occurred in the course of employment, especially given the presumption afforded to unwitnessed accidents within the scope of employment under Workers' Compensation Law § 21.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsEmployment CausalityMotor Vehicle FatalityOn-Premises AccidentWorkers' Compensation Board AppealScope of EmploymentUnwitnessed Accident PresumptionJudicial ReviewAppellate Division AffirmationInsurance Carrier Appeal
References
6
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 06496
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 14, 2017

Matter of Cortes v. Eagle Sys., Inc.

Patricio Cortes, a truck driver, was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought workers' compensation benefits from his employer, Eagle Systems, Inc. Although XL Specialty Insurance was the proper workers' compensation carrier, it failed to appear at hearings. Zurich American Insurance Company, despite not being the carrier and not on notice, participated, arguing Cortes was an independent contractor. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found Cortes to be an employee and his injuries compensable. Zurich appealed, asserting standing based on a contingency liability policy, but both the Workers' Compensation Board and the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed that Zurich lacked standing as it was not a direct party to the claim and its liability was a contractual issue beyond the Board's jurisdiction.

Workers' CompensationAppellate ReviewStandingInsurance LiabilityIndependent ContractorEmployer-Employee RelationshipJurisdictionMotor Vehicle AccidentContingency Policy
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Workers' Compensation Commission v. City of Eagle Pass/Texas Municipal League Workers' Compensation Joint Insurance Fund

The Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission appealed a district court judgment that reversed a Commission order assessing penalties against the City of Eagle Pass and Capital Metro Transportation Authority for late benefit payments. The district court had ruled that these political subdivisions were immune from administrative penalties due to sovereign immunity, which the Legislature had not expressly waived. The appellate court disagreed, holding that political subdivisions do not possess independent sovereignty and therefore have no sovereign immunity against the State from which they derive their existence. Furthermore, the court found that the Labor Code, specifically after its 1993 codification incorporating the Code Construction Act's definition of "person," clearly authorizes the Commission to assess administrative penalties against political subdivisions as "persons." Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and rendered judgment in favor of the Commission, reinstating the penalties.

Sovereign ImmunityAdministrative PenaltiesWorkers' Compensation ActPolitical SubdivisionsGovernmental ImmunityStatutory ConstructionLabor CodeInsurance CarriersSelf-InsuranceCode Construction Act
References
13
Case No. ADJ1009271 (AHM 0055424)
Regular
Apr 27, 2009

MYRNA PEREZ vs. FIDELITY FEDERAL BANK, TIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO., REM, LTD, GOLDEN EAGLE

This case concerns a contribution dispute between two insurance carriers, TIG and Golden Eagle, for a cumulative trauma injury claim. Golden Eagle sought reconsideration of an order compelling it to pay over $\$101,000$ in contribution to TIG. Golden Eagle argued it was never properly served with a notice of intention and that Labor Code section 5275 mandates arbitration for contribution disputes. The Appeals Board agreed that mandatory arbitration applies, rescinded the order, and remanded the case for either informal resolution or arbitration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder of ContributionPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5275mandatory arbitrationContributionCumulative Trauma InjuryCompromise and Release AgreementPetition for ContributionNotice of Intention
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 115 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