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. 2014 NY Slip Op 07601 [122 AD3d 428]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 06, 2014

Hill v. Acies Group, LLC

Plaintiff Anthony Hill, a worker at a construction site, was struck by a falling brick while cleaning debris, sustaining injuries. He initiated an action, and his motion for partial summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) was denied by the Supreme Court, Bronx County. Upon appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously reversed the lower court's order. The appellate court found that Hill had established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, citing the absence of overhead protective devices as a proximate cause of his injuries. It also held that comparative negligence is not a defense to a Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and rejected the argument that an employer's instruction to avoid unsafe practices functions as a safety device. Consequently, the motion for partial summary judgment on liability was granted against defendants Acies Group, LLC, CS Melrose Site D, LLC, and Skye Construction, LLC.

Construction AccidentFalling ObjectLabor Law ClaimSummary JudgmentLiabilityProximate CauseSafety DevicesAppellate ReviewReversalWorker Safety
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Dodd v. City of Beverly Hills

Noah Kenneth Dodd sued his former employer, the City of Beverly Hills, alleging wrongful termination due to a violation of the City's nepotism policy. The City contended Dodd was an at-will employee and moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. On appeal, Dodd challenged the summary judgment, arguing that genuine issues of material fact existed. The appellate court found a fact issue regarding the Mayor's authority to terminate Dodd, citing the City's General Personnel Manual which suggested only the City Council could hire or terminate employees. Consequently, the court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings.

Wrongful TerminationSummary JudgmentAt-Will EmploymentNepotism PolicyDeclaratory Judgment ActMayoral AuthorityCity CouncilLocal Government CodeProcedural Due ProcessAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. 10-00-403-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2002

Noah Kenneth Dodd v. Beverly Hills, City Of

Noah Kenneth Dodd sued his former employer, the City of Beverly Hills, alleging wrongful termination. The City moved for and was granted summary judgment by the trial court. Dodd appealed, arguing that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding his termination and the Mayor's authority to fire him. The appeals court found that the summary judgment motion complied with Rule 166a(i) but determined that Dodd's employment status remained at-will, making the reason for termination irrelevant. However, the court found a genuine issue of material fact regarding Mayor Gibbs' authority to terminate Dodd, as the General Personnel Manual indicated the city council as the appointing authority. Therefore, the summary judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Wrongful TerminationSummary JudgmentAt-Will EmploymentNepotism PolicyMayoral AuthorityDeclaratory JudgmentAppellate ReviewTexas LawLocal Government CodeGenuine Issues of Material Fact
References
11
Case No. No. 10-12-00197-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 05, 2013

Brian Dunn, Janel Dunn and Leisel Moseley v. Happy Hill Farm Academy/Home and Happy Hill Farm Children's Home Endowment Fund, Happy Hill Farm Children Home, Inc., A/K/A Dallas Cowboys Courage House

Appellants Leisel Moseley, Brian Dunn, and Janel Dunn appealed a summary judgment favoring Happy Hill Farm Academy/Home and related entities. They claimed wrongful termination, alleging Happy Hill Farm operates as a treatment or mental-health facility under the Texas Health and Safety Code, and contested the applicability of statutory exemptions. The court affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that Happy Hill Farm is neither a treatment nor a mental-health facility, but a basic child care facility with a school. Furthermore, the court found Happy Hill Farm exempt from former Chapter 242 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, as it operates under the jurisdiction of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, a recognized state agency.

Summary judgmentWrongful terminationTexas Health and Safety CodeMental health facilityTreatment facilityBoarding schoolState agency exemptionEmployment at willRetaliatory dischargeMedical misconduct
References
17
Case No. 2018-01-0675
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 09, 2019

Hill, Camesha v. Allegis Group

Camesha Hill, an employee, sustained a head injury while working for Allegis Group. She requested a panel of shoulder orthopedists after a directly referred doctor declined to see her. The employer argued that it fulfilled its obligations by providing an initial panel and accepting subsequent referrals to doctors within the same practice group. The court found that the employer was not required to provide another panel and denied Ms. Hill's requested relief.

Expedited HearingMedical BenefitsPhysician PanelReferralShoulder InjuryCausationTreating PhysicianEmployer ObligationsTennessee LawWorkers' Compensation Claims
References
1
Case No. 05-20-00644-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 25, 2022

Albert G. Hill, III v. Margaret Keliher, in Her Capacity as Personal Representative and Successor Independent of the Estate of Albert G. Hill, Jr., and Carol E. Irwin, in Her Capacity

This appeal concerns Albert G. Hill, III's (Hill III) claims for malicious prosecution, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting, which were dismissed by the probate court under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA). Hill III alleged his criminal indictment for false statements on a home equity loan was influenced by his father, Albert G. Hill, Jr., and others, acting with malice and without probable cause. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, ruling that the TCPA applied to Hill III's claims. The court found Hill III failed to establish a prima facie case, specifically lacking clear and specific evidence that false information knowingly supplied by appellees was the "but for" cause of his prosecution or that appellees lacked probable cause. The dismissal of criminal charges on procedural grounds was not deemed evidence of unjustifiable prosecution or lack of probable cause.

Texas Citizens Participation ActTCPAMalicious ProsecutionCivil ConspiracyAiding and AbettingAppellate ProcedureEvidentiary RulingPrima Facie CaseProbable CauseFree Speech
References
15
Case No. 154970/19 | Appeal No. 5599 | Case No. 2024-06451
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 15, 2026

Russell v. Lenox Hill Hosp.

Plaintiff James Russell, an employee of a delivery service, sustained injuries while unloading a blood irradiator machine at Lenox Hill Hospital, falling off a truck after the machine rolled towards him. The Supreme Court had denied Lenox Hill Hospital's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 200 claims and common-law negligence, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) liability, and denied Rad Source Technologies' motion to dismiss the third-party complaint. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed these decisions, dismissing both the complaint against Lenox Hill Hospital and the third-party complaint. The court ruled that plaintiff was not a covered worker under Labor Law § 240(1) as the electrical work was unrelated to his activity and completed before delivery. Furthermore, Lenox Hill Hospital did not supervise or control plaintiff's work, negating Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence liability. The third-party complaint was also dismissed, as Rad Source cannot be held liable for the negligence of an independent contractor, and delivery work is not considered inherently dangerous.

Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 200Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewConstruction AccidentIndependent ContractorDelivery ServicesPremises LiabilityLoading Dock InjuryUnloading Equipment
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Calhoun v. Hill

Edward P. Calhoun and wife sued Homer A. (Bud) Hill for the wrongful death of their son, Robert Calhoun, who died after being crushed by a hydraulic gate at Hill's feed lot. The incident occurred when Robert and another employee, Wesley Johnson, were racing through a dipping vat, with foreman Ted Hankins acting as a starter, during work hours but while waiting for lumber. The jury initially found in favor of the Calhouns, determining that Johnson and Hankins were in the course of their employment and negligent. However, the trial court granted Hill's motion for judgment non obstante veredicto. On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the employees' actions (the race) were personal and not in furtherance of Hill's business, thus suspending the master-servant relationship and relieving Hill of liability. The court also ruled that the foreman's awareness did not impose a duty on the employer to forbid such personal activities.

NegligenceWrongful DeathScope of EmploymentMaster-Servant RelationshipJudgment Non Obstante VeredictoVice-PrincipalPersonal ActivityEmployer LiabilityAppellate ReviewProximate Cause
References
13
Case No. 2024-50-2711
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 20, 2026

Lusk v. Portopiccolo Group LLC, dba The Portopiccolo Group

This interlocutory appeal concerns an employer's denial of medical treatment for an employee's work-related injuries. Employee Cheryl Lusk, injured by a resident at Portopiccolo Group, LLC, was recommended for cervical spine surgery by her authorized treating physician, Dr. John Burleson. The employer denied the surgery based on a utilization review report, which was upheld by the Bureau's Medical Director. The trial court, however, ordered the employer to provide the surgery, relying on the presumption of medical necessity for treatment recommended by an authorized physician. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the employer failed to rebut this presumption, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationMedical Treatment DenialUtilization ReviewSurgical AuthorizationPresumption of Medical NecessityEmployer AppealCervical Spine InjuryACDF SurgeryAuthorized Treating PhysicianBurden of Proof
References
8
Case No. ADJ11391724, ADJ11391757
Regular
Oct 03, 2019

PABLO LOPEZ DURAN vs. SOUTH HILLS ACADEMY, CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA, CRESCENT HOTELS & RESORTS, LLC, CHUBB INSURANCE GROUP, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves applicant Pablo Lopez Duran and multiple defendants including South Hills Academy, Church Mutual Insurance Company, Security National Insurance Company, Crescent Hotels & Resorts, LLC, and Chubb Insurance Group. The Board granted a petition for reconsideration and affirmed a prior order regarding sanctions and costs. Specifically, Chubb Insurance Group, administered by Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc., was ordered to pay an additional $395 for attorneys' fees related to a petition for fees, less any credit for prior payments.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSOUTH HILLS ACADEMYCHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANYSECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANYAMTRUST NORTH AMERICACRESCENT HOTELS & RESORTSLLCCHUBB INSURANCE GROUPGALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICESINC.
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 2,288 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