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
Oct 12, 1995

Werner v. Colwell

Dixie Colwell sued Karlo Werner, Eastex Meat Processing, Inc., and I.M. Werner for personal injuries sustained while working at Eastex, a workers' compensation non-subscriber. The trial court found negligence against Werner and Eastex, and I.M. Werner liable as trustee of an employee benefit plan. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision. However, the Supreme Court of Texas reversed the lower judgments and remanded for a new trial. The court held that Karlo Werner owed no duty to Colwell as a co-employee, that Colwell failed to prove Eastex provided an unsafe work environment, and that I.M. Werner was improperly held liable as trustee due to lack of proper naming and service in that capacity.

Personal InjuryNegligenceCo-employee DutySafe WorkplaceWorkers' Compensation Non-subscriberEmployee Benefit PlanERISATrustee LiabilityGeneral AppearanceRemand for New Trial
References
14
Case No. 14-20-00354-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 16, 2021

Lucina Patricia Trujillo, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Nathaniel Andrew Boado, And Ivan Ricardo Trujillo, Individually v. Werner Enterprises, Inc.

Appellants Lucina Patricia Trujillo and Ivan Ricardo Trujillo sued Werner Enterprises, Inc. following a fatal vehicle accident, alleging vicarious liability as a carrier or negligent hiring as a broker. The trial court granted summary judgment for Werner, concluding it acted as a broker and the claims were preempted by federal law. On appeal, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings. The appellate court found a genuine issue of material fact regarding Werner's role, citing contradictory evidence from the 'Transportation Agreement' labeling Werner as 'Carrier' and a bill of lading, versus a 'Broker-Carrier Agreement' and deposition testimony identifying Werner as a 'Broker.' The court did not reach the federal preemption issue due to its reversal on Werner's status.

Motor Carrier LiabilityBrokerageSummary Judgment ReversalFatal Vehicle AccidentVicarious LiabilityFederal Transportation LawContractual InterpretationTexas Court of AppealsFact DisputeRemand
References
14
Case No. 14-18-00967-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 2023

Werner Enterprises, Inc. and Shiraz A. Ali v. Jennifer Blake, Individually and as Next Friend for Nathan Blake, and as Heir of the Estate of Zachery Blake, And Eldridge Moak, in His Capacity as Guardian of the Estate of Briana Blake

A Texas appellate court affirmed a $100 million judgment against Werner Enterprises, Inc. and its driver, Shiraz A. Ali, following a fatal truck accident on an icy Interstate 20. The plaintiffs, including Jennifer Blake and the guardian of Brianna Blake's estate, sued for negligence, leading to a jury finding of liability against both Ali and Werner. The court upheld the findings of Ali's negligence and Werner's direct liability for negligent training and supervision, rejecting arguments related to the 'respondeat superior admission rule'. The judgment also affirmed the jury's apportionment of responsibility and the substantial award for future medical expenses for Brianna Blake, who suffered severe traumatic brain injury.

Trucking AccidentNegligenceVicarious LiabilityDirect LiabilityNegligent HiringNegligent SupervisionNegligent TrainingComparative ResponsibilityJury Charge ErrorExpert Testimony
References
153
Case No. 2024-10-4034
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 2025

Russell, Brittney v. Werner Enterprises, Inc.

In this interlocutory appeal, the Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board reviewed a trial court's decision to award benefits to employee Brittney Russell. Ms. Russell sustained serious injuries after being assaulted by a customer's husband while performing her delivery duties, following a verbal dispute related to her job performance. The employer, Werner Enterprises, Inc., contended the assault stemmed from a personal dispute or a neutral force, arguing it lacked connection to employment. The trial court, however, concluded the assault was inherently connected to Ms. Russell's employment, a finding affirmed by the Appeals Board. The Board agreed that the work-related disagreement served as the catalyst for the assault, thus upholding the compensability of her injury and remanding the case.

Workplace assaultEmployee injuryWorkers' CompensationScope of employmentArising out of employmentNeutral force assaultPersonal disputeInterlocutory appealAppeals BoardEmployer liability
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Appointment of a Guardian of Person & Property of Spingarn

Claire Spingarn, a 95-year-old woman with substantial assets, faced a guardianship petition initiated by her son and daughter under Article 81 of the Mental Hygiene Law, seeking the daughter's appointment as guardian. Claire, opposing her daughter's appointment due to long-standing antipathy, retained her own counsel. The court ultimately appointed a non-family member as guardian on June 6, 1994, tailoring the order to Claire's personal and property-management needs. This opinion addresses the reasonableness of the legal fees requested by the petitioners' attorneys, citing concerns about the amount, billing methods, and excessive hours. The court found many billed hours unnecessary, duplicative, and not the responsibility of Claire Spingarn, consequently reducing the legal fee to $32,500.

GuardianshipMental Hygiene Law Article 81Legal FeesAttorney CompensationReasonable FeesElder LawFee ReductionCourt EvaluatorFiduciary DutiesBilling Practices
References
17
Case No. W2023-00441-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2024

Werner Reichenberger v. Deniece Thomas, Commissioner

Werner Reichenberger appealed the denial of his unemployment compensation benefits by the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development. The chancery court reversed the Department's decision, finding it arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion. The Department appealed to the Court of Appeals of Tennessee. The appellate court affirmed the chancery court's decision, ruling that the Department's insistence on strict compliance with an unpublished identification policy, despite Reichenberger providing credible proof of identity, was arbitrary and capricious. The case was remanded for further proceedings to the Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Division of Unemployment Security.

Unemployment BenefitsAdministrative AppealJudicial ReviewIdentity VerificationEligibility ConditionsArbitrary and CapriciousAbuse of DiscretionGovernment RegulationTennessee LawLabor and Workforce Development
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 01, 1987

Kurten v. R. D. Werner Co.

The plaintiff Karl Kurten was allegedly injured after falling from a ladder manufactured by R. D. Werner Co., Inc. while working on the premises of his employer, Sylvan Equipment Corp. The fall was reportedly caused by the ladder's feet slipping. An action was commenced against Werner, alleging negligence in manufacturing and design, and strict products liability. A separate claim was made against Sylvan for tortiously altering the ladder, which allegedly impaired the case against Werner. Werner moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiffs' counsel had judicially admitted the alteration precluded establishing a prima facie case of negligence. The Supreme Court initially denied this motion. On appeal, the order was reversed, the motion for summary judgment was granted, and the complaint against Werner was dismissed, as the plaintiffs failed to produce new evidentiary proof to counter their previous admission.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentSummary JudgmentProducts LiabilityNegligenceAltered EvidenceJudicial AdmissionPrima Facie CaseAppellate ReviewKings County
References
3
Case No. ADJ795254 (MON 0270524)
Regular
Feb 15, 2013

Hattie Goings vs. Werner Enterprises, Travelers Insurance Company

This case involves Hattie Goings' petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award that increased her permanent disability rating. Goings claims the administrative law judge erred on multiple grounds, including improper use of the Medical Provider Network, failure to reopen for additional injuries, and evidentiary issues. The defendant, Werner Enterprises, asserts it was not properly served with the petition for reconsideration. Therefore, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to allow the defendant to file a timely answer, ensuring due process.

Petition to ReopenFindings and AwardPermanent Disability IncreaseMedical Provider NetworkIndependent ContractorGood Cause to ReopenPetition for ReconsiderationDue ProcessLife PensionTotally Permanently Disabled
References
1
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00657
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2020

Matter of Dibenedetto v. Rochester City Sch. Dist.

Claimant Claire Dibenedetto, who suffered a work-related left shoulder injury in 2012, sought to amend her workers' compensation claim to include consequential Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) in her left and right upper extremities. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially approved the amendment and related medical treatments, but the Workers' Compensation Board subsequently modified this decision, ruling that CRPS was not established and adjusting the disability rate. The Board also resolved disputed medical bills and denied further injections against the claimant. Upon appeal, the Appellate Division reversed the Board's decisions and remitted the matter for further proceedings. The court found that the Board's determination might have been based on an incomplete review of the record, specifically failing to consider a crucial medical report from a physician at the Cleveland Clinic.

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)Consequential InjuryMedical Evidence ReviewDisability DeterminationAppellate RemittalIndependent Medical Examination (IME)Pain Management TreatmentClaim AmendmentBoard DiscretionCredibility Assessment
References
7
Case No. ADJ182223 (WCK 0010755) ADJ2640291 (OAK 0313072) ADJ2670444 (OAK 0331911)
Regular
Mar 27, 2009

CLAIRE SCHLOENVOGT vs. GRANNY GOOSE FOODS, INC., CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION BY SERVICING AGENCY, CAMBRIDGE SAN DIEGO, FREMONT INDEMNITY IN LIQUIDATION, TRAVELERS

This case involves applicant Claire Schloenvogt's workers' compensation claims, specifically concerning injuries to his shoulders, neck, and back. The California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) sought reconsideration of a decision that denied a cumulative trauma injury claim ending on October 31, 1999. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) opinion supported a cumulative trauma injury based on the applicant's 30 years of employment. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings to include this cumulative trauma injury finding.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClaire SchloenvogtGranny Goose FoodsCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationFremont IndemnityTravelerscumulative trauma injurybilateral shouldersneckback
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 33 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