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
May 11, 2004

Claim of Frank v. New York City Transit Authority

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision that found a causal relationship between a decedent's death and his employment. The employer engaged in prolonged retaliatory and harassing conduct, including unjustifiably withholding differential pay, threatening to revoke medical benefits, refusing to reimburse pharmacy expenses, denying vacation leave, and filing a false claim of absence without leave. This behavior, alongside repeated failures to substantiate claims regarding benefit overpayments, led to prolonged hearings. Following one such hearing, the decedent suffered a fatal myocardial infarction. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board subsequently found a causal connection between the employer's conduct and the decedent's death. The Appellate Court affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that the death resulted from the employer's "prolonged pattern of intimidation, deceit, and unlawful coercion, the wrongful withholding of benefits to which decedent was entitled, and generally disgraceful conduct towards the decedent." The employer's claims regarding witness preclusion were dismissed as not properly before the court.

Workers' CompensationCausationEmployer RetaliationStress-Related DeathMyocardial InfarctionBenefits WithholdingAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceProcedural IssuesUnjustified Conduct
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 26, 1979

Klebe v. General Electric Co.

The claimant's decedent, an employee in the employer’s laboratory, became ill and died from cerebral edema on September 14, 1971. The Workers’ Compensation Board investigated whether the brain condition was causally connected to his employment. The Board determined, based on record evidence including an impartial specialist’s testimony, that there was no causal relation between the decedent’s death and exposure to dioxane fumes, and thus no accident or occupational disease arising from employment. This finding rebutted the presumptions of causal connection under Workers’ Compensation Law sections 21 and 47. Consequently, the Board’s decision denying benefits was affirmed upon appeal, with the court noting the claimant's reliance on Matter of Matthews v General Elec. Co. was misplaced.

Workers' CompensationCausal ConnectionCerebral EdemaOccupational DiseasePresumption RebuttalAppellate ReviewEmployment-Related IllnessDioxane FumesMedical EvidenceBoard Decision
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co. of Wisconsin v. Parker

This is a Workmen's Compensation appeal where Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Wisconsin (defendant) appealed a judgment favoring Alton A. Parker (plaintiff). Parker claimed total and permanent disability due to cancer resulting from radiation exposure during his employment. The defendant contended there was no evidence establishing a causal link between the work-incurred radiation and Parker's cancer. The court reviewed the medical expert testimonies, finding them insufficient to prove a causal connection based on reasonable medical probability. The trial court's judgment was reversed, and judgment was rendered that the plaintiff take nothing, concluding that medical opinions were speculative without accurate information on radiation exposure.

CancerRadiation ExposureCausal ConnectionMedical TestimonyExpert WitnessesTotal DisabilityPermanent DisabilityOccupational HazardLymphomaSeminoma
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n v. Schaefer

Bobby G. Schaefer, a plumber, sued Texas Employers’ Insurance Association for worker's compensation due to an occupational disease, atypical tuberculosis (mycobacteriosis intracellular). The jury found for Schaefer, but the defendant appealed. The court reviewed Texas Workmen’s Compensation Laws (Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 8306, § 20) regarding occupational diseases and the necessity of proving a causal connection to employment. Despite expert medical testimony suggesting increased exposure opportunities for plumbers, the court found insufficient evidence that Schaefer's disease arose out of or in the course of his employment, or that it was not an "ordinary disease of life" to which the general public is exposed. The court reversed the trial court's judgment, rendering a take-nothing judgment for Schaefer.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' CompensationCausationMedical ProbabilityLegal SufficiencyTexas LawMycobacteriosis IntracellularTuberculosisEmployer LiabilityBurden of Proof
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n v. Sparrow

Allen Sparrow, an employee of Southern Stevedoring & Contracting Company, was fatally stabbed by a co-worker, Washington Jackson, on November 18, 1935, at the Beaumont city wharf during a labor strike. Due to the strike, non-striking longshoremen were confined to the wharf 24/7, leading to heightened tensions. Sparrow's parents, Steve and Celena Sparrow, sought workers' compensation, which the Industrial Accident Board awarded. The Texas Employers Insurance Association, the compensation carrier, appealed, arguing Sparrow's death was not work-related. The appellate court affirmed the compensation award, ruling that the unique employment conditions significantly increased the risk of injury, thus establishing a causal connection to his employment.

Workers' CompensationFatal InjuryWorkplace ViolenceCourse of EmploymentSpecial HazardStrike ConditionsIndustrial AccidentTexas LawEmployer LiabilityInsurance Carrier
References
5
Case No. 13-17-00346-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2019

Audrey Nickerson v. Julio Pineda and Unique Employment, LLC, Unique Employment Services, Unique Employment I, LTD, D/B/A Unique Employment Services

Audrey Nickerson, an employee of the City of Corpus Christi, sued Julio Pineda, a temporary worker, and Unique Employment Services for negligence after Pineda, operating a City-owned backhoe, caused an injury. Appellees filed a plea to the jurisdiction, which the trial court granted. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of claims against Pineda, determining he qualified as a government employee under the Texas Tort Claims Act and was therefore immune from suit. However, the court reversed the dismissal of claims against Unique Employment Services, concluding that the borrowed-employee doctrine, on which Unique relied, is an affirmative defense to liability and not a jurisdictional matter properly addressed in a plea to the jurisdiction. The case against Unique was remanded for further proceedings.

Plea to the JurisdictionGovernmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActElection of RemediesBorrowed Employee DoctrineNegligenceTemporary StaffingVicarious LiabilityAppellate ReviewSubject Matter Jurisdiction
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Adler v. Guild Electronics

The claimant appeals a Workers' Compensation Board decision from July 1, 1982, which found no causal relationship between the decedent's employment and his death from immunoblastic lymphoma. The claimant's expert testified to a direct link with toxic substance exposure at work, while the employer's expert and an impartial specialist found no such connection due to limited medical research. The Board resolved this factual dispute against the claimant, a decision supported by substantial evidence. The court, noting that the Board is responsible for weighing conflicting medical evidence, affirmed the Board's finding.

Workers' CompensationCausal RelationshipImmunoblastic LymphomaToxic ExposureMedical Expert OpinionFactual DisputeSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewDiseaseEmployment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of McIver v. Mobil Oil Corp.

A claimant, employed by Mobil Oil Corporation, suffered a foot injury in 1975 that led to the development of a synovial sarcoma and subsequent amputation. The claimant filed for workers' compensation, but Mobil denied a causal connection between the injury and the cancer. After conflicting expert medical testimony and procedural disputes regarding expert witnesses and evidence, the Workers' Compensation Board concluded that a causal relationship existed. Mobil appealed this decision, raising concerns about due process and the removal of evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding no merit in Mobil's contentions.

Workers' CompensationCausal ConnectionSynovial SarcomaAmputationExpert Medical TestimonyDue ProcessImpartial SpecialistEvidentiary RulesCross-examinationBoard Decision
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Crump v. Saint Patrick's Church

The decedent, claimant's husband, collapsed at work and died of coronary artery disease. Due to the unwitnessed incident at work, a presumption of causal relation to employment arose under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1). Initially, the self-insured employer failed to rebut this presumption, leading to an award of benefits. However, upon review, the Workers’ Compensation Board rescinded the determination and allowed for consideration of a report from the employer’s medical expert. This expert provided uncontroverted testimony that there was no causal relation between the decedent’s work activities and his death. The Board affirmed this decision, which was further supported by evidence including the decedent's pre-work complaints of dizziness and pain, minimal strenuous activity at work, and an autopsy revealing no new heart damage. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that the employer had provided substantial evidence to overcome the presumption of compensability.

Causal RelationPresumption of CompensabilityCoronary Artery DiseaseMedical Expert TestimonySubstantial EvidenceRebuttalAppellate ReviewEmployment DeathUnderlying Medical ConditionWorkers' Compensation Board Decision
References
3
Case No. 2015-03-0231
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 2016

Reese, Ronald v. Waste Connections, Inc.

Ronald Reese, a truck driver for Waste Connections, Inc., filed for an expedited hearing seeking temporary disability and medical benefits for a back injury. Reese alleged a gradual injury from his strenuous job, exacerbated by lifting groceries at home. The employer, Waste Connections, Inc., and its carrier ESIS, Inc., denied the claim, arguing the injury was not work-related and that Reese failed to prove a causal link to employment. Judge Pamela B. Johnson of the Court of Workers' Compensation Claims at Knoxville denied the benefits, finding Reese did not present sufficient medical evidence demonstrating his employment contributed more than fifty percent to his injury. The court also excluded certain medical reports due to untimely submission.

Expedited HearingTemporary Disability BenefitsMedical BenefitsLow Back PainLumbar Degenerative Disc DiseaseSacroiliac SprainCausal ConnectionBurden of ProofMedical Records ExclusionJudicial Procedure
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 15,987 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