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

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 17 v. Union Concrete & Construction Corp.

Plaintiff International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 17, AFL-CIO ("Local 17") filed a grievance against Union Concrete and Construction Corporation ("UCC") to compel arbitration regarding UCC's emergency snow removal work for Erie County in November 2014, alleging violations of their Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). UCC argued the work was not covered by the CBA's "Heavy and/or Highway Construction" definition, rendering the arbitration clause inapplicable. Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation to grant UCC's motion for summary judgment and deny Local 17's. United States District Judge Richard J. Arcara conducted a de novo review and adopted the Magistrate Judge's findings in their entirety, concluding that the emergency snow removal work did not constitute "Heavy and/or Highway Construction" under the CBA. Consequently, Local 17’s motion for summary judgment to compel arbitration was denied, and UCC’s motion for summary judgment was granted, leading to the closure of the case.

Labor Management Relations ActCollective Bargaining AgreementArbitrabilitySummary JudgmentContract InterpretationEmergency Snow RemovalHeavy ConstructionHighway ConstructionScope of Arbitration ClauseDe Novo Review
References
26
Case No. 05-17-01435-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 01, 2018

Ramer Concrete, Inc. v. Juan Cardona

This case involves a work-related personal injury claim against a workers' compensation non-subscriber employer, Ramer Concrete, Inc., by its former employee Juan Cardona. Cardona sustained injuries while cleaning a concrete hose, alleging inadequate manpower for the task. Ramer appealed an adverse judgment, challenging the trial court's failure to file findings of fact and conclusions of law and the legal sufficiency of the evidence regarding duty, causation, and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no harm from the lack of findings, and sufficient evidence to establish Ramer's breach of duty, proximate cause of Cardona's injuries, and the awarded damages for physical impairment and medical expenses.

Personal InjuryNegligenceAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceFindings of FactConclusions of LawDuty of CareProximate CauseDamagesPhysical Impairment
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Central Ready Mix Concrete Co. v. Islas

Luciano Islas, an employee of independent contractor Eugene Taylor, sustained severe injuries while cleaning a concrete truck drum for Central Ready Mix Concrete Company, which lacked workers' compensation insurance. A jury initially found all parties partially at fault, but the trial court subsequently granted a judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of Central, holding Taylor solely liable. The court of appeals reversed this decision, but the Supreme Court of Texas overturned the appellate court's ruling, reinstating the original trial court judgment for Central. The Supreme Court emphasized that owners like Central generally owe no duty to ensure the safety practices of independent contractors' employees unless actual control is retained, and that the repair work was not inherently dangerous enough to impose a nondelegable duty. Therefore, Central was not held liable for Islas's injuries.

Workers' CompensationIndependent ContractorPremises LiabilityDuty to WarnInherently Dangerous ActivityNondelegable DutyJudgment Notwithstanding the VerdictTexas LawOccupational SafetyEmployer Liability
References
24
Case No. 2016-06-1981
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 2017

Funez, Victor v. Brothers Concrete Company

Victor Funez filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking temporary total disability and medical benefits for a work-related right knee injury sustained on October 3, 2016, while working for Brothers Concrete Company. The employer did not object to a decision on the record. The Court found that Mr. Funez would likely prevail, establishing his entitlement to medical and temporary disability benefits. Brothers Concrete was ordered to provide past and ongoing medical treatment and temporary partial disability benefits. Furthermore, Mr. Funez was deemed eligible to apply for benefits from the Uninsured Employer’s Fund due to Brothers Concrete Company not carrying workers’ compensation insurance.

Workers' CompensationTemporary DisabilityMedical BenefitsKnee InjuryUninsured EmployerExpedited HearingTennessee LawConstruction AccidentMCL SprainDisability Benefits
References
8
Case No. 2015-05-0078
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 14, 2015

Dyer, Jimmy v. Tankersley Concrete

Jimmy E. Dyer, the Employee, filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking medical and/or temporary disability benefits for a left shoulder injury sustained on March 13, 2015, while working for Tankersley Concrete. Tankersley Concrete denied the claim, arguing Mr. Dyer failed to prove the injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment and suggesting another cause (moving to a new residence). The Court found that Mr. Dyer experienced pain in his left shoulder while lifting concrete molds at work and gave verbal notice. While Mr. Dyer established a specific set of circumstances causing the injury, he had not yet proven medical causation, as the authorized providers did not provide a causation opinion. Citing McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, the Court ruled that prohibiting medical care without a prior expert causation opinion would be unreasonable. Therefore, the Court ordered Tankersley to provide Mr. Dyer with a panel of orthopedic physicians for an evaluation to obtain a medical causation opinion. Mr. Dyer's claim for temporary disability benefits was denied at this time due to the lack of established medical causation.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingMedical CausationLeft Shoulder InjuryTemporary Disability BenefitsRotator Cuff Sprain/StrainOrthopedic EvaluationPanel of PhysiciansBurden of ProofTennessee Law
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Higbie Roth Construction Co. v. Houston Shell & Concrete

Higbie Roth Construction Company appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Houston Shell & Concrete and Bullet Concrete Materials, Inc. Higbie sought to establish that claims of "wrongful increase in workers’ compensation premiums" constitute an actionable tort in Texas, stemming from an employee injury attributed to the defendants' alleged negligence. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that increased workers' compensation premiums were not foreseeable damages for a negligence claim. Furthermore, Higbie's Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) claims for conjectural future damages were deemed not actionable under the "producing cause" standard.

Workers' CompensationNegligenceSummary JudgmentTexas Deceptive Trade Practices ActForeseeabilityEconomic LossInsurance PremiumsTort LawAppellate ReviewCause of Action
References
29
Case No. 03-99-00606-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2000

Stan Stumph, D/B/A Concrete Concepts/Dallas Fire Insurance Company v. Dallas Fire Insurance Company/Stan Stumph, D/B/A Concrete Concepts

Stan Stumph, d/b/a Concrete Concepts, initiated a lawsuit against Dallas Fire Insurance Company due to their refusal to defend and indemnify him in a prior suit. A jury ruled in Stumph's favor, awarding damages. Both parties appealed: Stumph sought treble damages, and Dallas Fire contested the actual damages. The Court of Appeals found Dallas Fire liable for unfair insurance practices and unconscionable conduct, stemming from misrepresentations by its agent regarding Stumph's policy and the agent's authority. The court concluded that coverage should have existed under the original policy, imposing a duty to defend and indemnify on Dallas Fire. Consequently, the appellate court modified the judgment to grant Stumph two times his actual damages and affirmed the modified judgment.

Insurance coverage disputeUnfair insurance practicesDeceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA)Insurance agent misrepresentationDuty to defendDuty to indemnifyActual damagesTreble damagesAppellate reviewContract law
References
25
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 03116 [238 AD3d 1415]
Regular Panel Decision
May 22, 2025

Matter of Balseca v. Hudson Concrete Inc.

Claimant Celso Balseca sought workers' compensation benefits for multiple injuries, including to his neck, back, and limbs, sustained from a fall off a ladder at work. The employer, Hudson Concrete Inc., and its carrier controverted the claim, challenging the accident's occurrence and causal relationship. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially disallowed the claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, crediting the claimant's testimony. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision. The court found substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that the accident arose from and in the course of employment and that the injuries were causally related, deferring to the Board's credibility findings and its role in weighing conflicting medical evidence.

Workers' CompensationLadder FallCausal RelationCredibility AssessmentSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewMedical EvidenceInjuries Arising out of EmploymentSpinal InjuriesShoulder Injuries
References
9
Case No. 2018-02-0004
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 26, 2019

Good, Willis T. v. Vickers Concrete Reinforcing, Inc.

The employee, Willis T. Good, sustained a work-related back injury while employed by Vickers Concrete Reinforcing, Inc. A settlement agreement was reached for permanent partial disability benefits, allowing the employee to petition for additional benefits after the initial compensation period. Upon the expiration of this period, the employee sought increased benefits, contending his new wages were less than 80% of his pre-injury average weekly wage, as per Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-241(a)(2)(C). The employer's motion for summary judgment was denied by the trial court, which found a genuine issue of material fact regarding the employee's status as an hourly or salaried worker in his subsequent employment and the interpretation of 'wages'. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision and remanded the case, concurring that a factual dispute precluded summary judgment.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryPermanent Partial DisabilitySummary JudgmentWage CalculationAppeals BoardEmployer LiabilityEmployee BenefitsSettlement AgreementStatutory Interpretation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Campbell Cleaning & Dye Works, Inc. v. Porter

This case concerns an appeal regarding a lawsuit filed by Jack Porter and his wife against Campbell Cleaning & Dye Works, Inc. The plaintiffs sought 630 hours of overtime pay for Mrs. Porter, who worked as a laundress, under Article 5169 of Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Statutes. The defendant contended that recovery was not possible as Mrs. Porter also worked in the dry cleaning department, not exclusively the laundry. The trial court found the departments intermingled, making differentiation impossible. The appellate court affirmed the finding that the work fell under the statute but reversed the award of attorney's fees, deeming them non-recoverable.

Overtime PayLaundry IndustryDry CleaningEmployment LawWage DisputeStatutory InterpretationAttorney's FeesTexas Civil ProcedureAppeal DecisionWorker Classification
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 10,451 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