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

A. F. v. Spence Chapin Agency

A 16-year-old father, who previously consented to the adoption of his out-of-wedlock infant, sought custody, attempting to revoke his consent. The birth mother had also surrendered the child to Spence Chapin Services for Families and Children, who placed the baby with preadoptive parents. The court examined the validity of the minor father's consent, whether it was statutorily or constitutionally required, and his standing to petition for custody. It found the father's consent invalid due to the agency's insufficient guidance for a minor, but determined his consent was not legally required under Domestic Relations Law § 111 (1) (e) as he did not meet the criteria for demonstrating paternal interest. Applying the 'best interest of the child' standard, the court ultimately denied the father's custody petition, concluding the preadoptive parents were better suited.

Adoption LawChild CustodyMinor Parents' RightsParental ConsentBest Interests of the ChildFamily LawUnmarried FathersRevocation of ConsentAdoption AgenciesLegal Standing
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Female D.

This case involves an appeal by prospective adoptive parents from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County, dated February 4, 1981. The original order had declared a section of the Domestic Relations Law unconstitutional as applied to the natural father, requiring his consent to adoption, vacated the natural mother's consent due to duress, and dismissed the adoption proceeding. The appellate court modified this order, denying the application to vacate the natural mother's consent and declaring the Domestic Relations Law constitutional. The court found overwhelming evidence that the natural mother's consent was freely given, despite her claims of coercion and duress. It also upheld the constitutionality of Domestic Relations Law § 111 (subd 1, par [e]), which sets criteria for requiring an unwed father's preadoption consent, finding it promotes the adoption of illegitimate newborns into stable families. The proceeding was remitted for further action consistent with the appellate decision.

Adoption LawParental RightsUnwed Fathers' RightsConsent to AdoptionDuressCoercionConstitutional LawDomestic Relations LawSurrogate's CourtAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. 04-09-00069-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2010

In Re Am

The maternal aunt and grandmother sought to adopt three children after the biological parents' rights were terminated. The trial court dismissed the suit for lack of standing because the petition was filed more than 90 days after parental rights termination, and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (managing conservator) did not consent. Appellants argued equitable estoppel, wrongful withholding of consent, and the unconstitutionality of the 90-day limitation in the Texas Family Code. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal, holding that equity cannot confer standing where statutory requirements are not met and that the 90-day deadline in Section 102.006 is constitutional. The court also clarified that Section 162.010 (allowing waiver of consent for good cause) does not apply until standing under Chapter 102 is established, and Section 102.006 does not require good faith for consent refusal. A concurring opinion urged legislative amendment to Section 102.006(b) to include a good cause component for consent refusal.

AdoptionStandingParental Rights TerminationFamily LawDue ProcessEquitable EstoppelManaging ConservatorshipStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewJurisdiction
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Catapano v. Jaw, Inc.

A claimant suffered work-related injuries in 1996, leading to an established workers' compensation claim. The employer's workers' compensation carrier sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund, which was found liable in 2000. Subsequently, the claimant settled a third-party personal injury action, and the carrier consented to the settlement and waived its lien without obtaining the Fund's consent. The Special Disability Fund refused reimbursement, leading the Workers' Compensation Board to rule that the Fund's consent was not required. The appellate court reversed the Board's decision, citing its failure to provide reasons for deviating from prior precedent requiring the Fund's consent in such situations. The matter was remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings.

Special Disability FundThird-party settlementWorkers' Compensation LawCarrier reimbursementBoard precedentArbitrary and capricious decisionConsent requirementWaiver of reimbursementAppellate reviewRemittal
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Scott v. Presidio I.S.D.

This opinion addresses a motion for rehearing filed by Robert Scott, in his official capacity as Texas Commissioner of Education. The case stems from a judicial appeal filed by the Presidio Independent School District in Travis County district court, challenging a Commissioner's decision in favor of a terminated teacher. The core legal question revolves around whether the Commissioner's consent was a jurisdictional prerequisite for the judicial appeal to be heard in Travis County, as required by Education Code section 21.307(a)(2) for "all parties." The court determined that the consent requirement is a jurisdictional prerequisite and that the Commissioner is indeed one of the "all parties" whose consent is needed. Since the Commissioner did not consent, the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Consequently, the court reversed the district court’s order denying the Commissioner’s plea to the jurisdiction and dismissed the District’s judicial appeal.

Sovereign ImmunityJurisdictional PrerequisiteEducation CodeJudicial ReviewTravis County District CourtAdministrative AppealConsent RequirementStatutory ConstructionGovernmental EntityPlea to Jurisdiction
References
30
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 05376 [198 AD3d 1045]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 07, 2021

Matter of DeGennaro v. H. Sand & Co., Inc.

Claimant Sergio Degennaro sustained work-related injuries in 2004 when he was struck by a vehicle. He obtained a settlement of approximately $1.6 million from Travelers Insurance Company in a third-party claim. The Workers' Compensation Board reversed a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's finding, ruling that Degennaro was barred from receiving further workers' compensation benefits. This was due to his failure to obtain the carrier's consent to the third-party settlement as required by Workers' Compensation Law § 29 (5). The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that the claimant bears the burden of establishing proper consent and that merely satisfying the carrier's lien is insufficient to waive formal consent requirements.

Workers' Compensation LawThird-Party SettlementCarrier ConsentLien ReimbursementWorkers' Compensation BenefitsStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewBurden of ProofWaiverWorkers' Compensation Board
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Laura G. v. Peter G.

This case addresses the paternity and child support obligations of a husband, Peter G., for a child, Alyssa, conceived through artificial insemination during his marriage to Laura G. The separation agreement initially absolved Peter G. of financial responsibility for Alyssa, which the court previously deemed void against public policy. The central issues were whether strict compliance with Domestic Relations Law § 73 for artificial insemination consent was required, and if Peter G. was responsible for child support based on consent or equitable estoppel. The court found that strict compliance with DRL § 73 was not required, and clear and convincing evidence showed Peter G.'s consent to the insemination. Furthermore, the court applied the doctrine of equitable estoppel, citing Peter G.'s actions and representations, and the best interests of the child, to hold him responsible for child support.

Artificial InseminationPaternityChild SupportEquitable EstoppelDomestic Relations LawFamily Court ActParental ObligationVasectomySeparation AgreementConsent
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Taylor v. Continental Insurance

Petitioner, injured in a May 1990 work-related automobile accident, was awarded workers' compensation benefits. Respondent, the compensation carrier, asserted a lien claim and required written consent for any third-party settlement. In July 1993, petitioner settled a third-party action for $60,000 without obtaining respondent's consent. Consequently, respondent suspended benefits, and the Workers' Compensation Board approved the termination of awards in May 1995. Nine years later, in November 2002, petitioner sought judicial approval of the settlement nunc pro tunc, which the Supreme Court granted. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the inordinate nine-year delay in seeking judicial approval was inexcusable, despite petitioner's prior knowledge of the consent requirement and the carrier's consistent assertion of its rights.

Workers CompensationJudicial ApprovalNunc Pro TuncPersonal Injury SettlementThird-Party ActionCarrier ConsentDelayPrejudiceStatutory InterpretationAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. 2006 NY Slip Op 26532, 14 Misc 3d 842
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 2006

Matter of Lyle A.

The case concerns Lyle A., a 4½-year-old child in foster care, who was prescribed Depakote Sprinkles for behavioral issues. The Monroe County Department of Human Services (Department) obtained consent from his mother through a caseworker, not the prescribing physician, and failed to respond adequately to her attempts to withdraw consent. The Family Court, Monroe County, ruled that the Department's procedures for obtaining parental consent for psychotropic medication and handling withdrawal of consent were legally insufficient, violating the child's and parent's due process and liberty rights. The court emphasized that informed consent requires direct physician consultation and that parents maintain the right to make medication decisions for children in foster care. The decision mandates the Department to reform its procedures for medication administration and consent.

Child NeglectFoster CarePsychotropic MedicationParental ConsentInformed ConsentDue ProcessLiberty InterestsMedical TreatmentWithdrawal of ConsentFamily Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Welch v. Mr. Christmas Inc.

The case concerns a professional actor (plaintiff) suing a manufacturer of artificial Christmas trees (defendant) under New York Civil Rights Law § 51 for unauthorized use of a television commercial. The defendant continued airing the commercial in 1975 after the original contract and option period had expired, despite warnings. A jury awarded both compensatory and exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision, clarifying that knowledge is not required for compensatory damages under § 51, and that for exemplary damages, "knowing use" without consent is sufficient, not requiring malice or recklessness. The court also held the defendant responsible for the distributor's unauthorized use and the principle of expired consent.

Civil Rights LawRight of PrivacyCommercial AppropriationUnauthorized AdvertisingExpired ConsentCompensatory DamagesExemplary DamagesPunitive Damages StandardsKnowing UseDistributor Responsibility
References
21
Showing 1-10 of 7,521 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