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

In Re Sterling Die Casting Co., Inc.

This case involves an appeal by Local 365 United Auto Workers Welfare and Pension Fund (the Fund) against Sterling Die Casting Company regarding the avoidance of a judgment lien under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b)(l)(4). The central issue is whether New York State practice regarding the docketing of judgments discriminates against federal court judgments. The Fund argued that its lien was created on the date of judgment in federal court, while Sterling contended it was created upon docketing with the county clerk, which fell within the 90-day preference period before its Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Judge's decision, holding that New York's C.P.L.R. 5018(b) does not discriminate and that a lien is established only upon filing a transcript with the county clerk, serving the practical need for centralized record-keeping.

Judgment LienBankruptcy Code Section 547(b)(l)(4)Federal vs. State JudgmentsNew York Civil Practice Law and Rules 5018(b)28 U.S.C. Section 1962Docketing JudgmentsProperty LienSupremacy ClauseRetroactive DocketingEastern District of New York
References
6
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 01036 [180 AD3d 515]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 13, 2020

Ortiz v. Mar-Can Transp. Co., Inc.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order granting defendants Mar-Can Transportation Co., Inc. and Ramonita Matos' motion to renew their summary judgment motion and dismiss the complaint. The court found the lower court properly exercised its discretion in granting renewal to correct a procedural error, as defendants had a right to enforce a prior preclusion order against the plaintiff, Rosalinda Ortiz. Defendants also made a prima facie showing that the action was barred by the Workers' Compensation Law's exclusivity provisions, establishing that Ortiz was Mar-Can's special employee at the time of the bus accident. Since Ortiz was precluded from submitting opposition, the dismissal was proper.

Workers' Compensation ExclusivitySpecial Employee DoctrineSummary Judgment RenewalProcedural Error CorrectionPreclusion Order EnforcementAppellate ReviewEmployment LiabilityBus Accident ClaimsNew York Appellate DivisionCivil Procedure
References
5
Case No. 13-07-00119-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 26, 2009

Margaret Villarreal v. Del Mar College

Margaret Villarreal appealed a summary judgment in favor of Del Mar College on her retaliation and national origin discrimination claims. Villarreal, a long-term employee, repeatedly sought reclassification of her nonexempt position to an exempt one, which would result in higher pay. After a previous discrimination charge was settled in 2002, her subsequent reclassification request in 2003 was denied, leading to this lawsuit. The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment, finding no evidence of a causal link between Villarreal's protected activity and the alleged retaliatory action, and concluding she failed to establish that she was treated less favorably than similarly situated Anglo employees for her discrimination claim. The court also held that the college provided legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its actions which Villarreal failed to prove were pretextual.

DiscriminationRetaliationEmployment LawSummary JudgmentNational Origin DiscriminationFair Labor Standards ActExempt StatusNonexempt StatusJob ReclassificationPrima Facie Case
References
50
Case No. 13-05-728-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 22, 2007

Del Mar College District v. Velda Vela

The case involves an employment discrimination suit where Del Mar College District appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The District contended that Velda Vela, the appellee, failed to file an administrative complaint within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice as required by the Texas Labor Code. The core issue revolved around conflicting statements regarding the dates of alleged discriminatory acts made by Vela in her deposition versus a subsequent affidavit. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the conflicting evidence created a fact issue regarding the dates of the alleged acts, which precluded dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. The court also declined to adopt the 'sham affidavit doctrine' in this context.

Employment DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentSexual HarassmentSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealAdministrative RemediesTimely FilingSham Affidavit DoctrineTexas Labor CodeCivil Practice and Remedies Code
References
26
Case No. 04-14-00622-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2014

Marisela G. Salas, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suares, Minor v. Allen Keller Co. I, L.L.C. D/B/A Allen Keller Co.

This case concerns an appeal of a summary judgment granted in favor of Allen Keller Co., a general contractor, in a negligence lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the estate of Martin Suarez, an employee of subcontractor C&B White Services, Inc., who died after falling from a truck while moving traffic control signs on a TxDOT roadway project. The appellant argued that Allen Keller Co. retained sufficient control over the work to be held liable. The trial court determined that Chapter 95 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code did not apply and granted summary judgment based on common law, finding that Allen Keller Co. did not exercise sufficient control over the specific activity causing the injury and had no actual knowledge of the danger. The appellee's brief asks the appellate court to affirm the trial court's judgment.

NegligenceSummary JudgmentIndependent ContractorPremises LiabilityDuty of CareTraffic ControlConstruction AccidentWrongful DeathAppellate ReviewTexas Law
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Roy Seger v. Yorkshire Insurance Co., Ltd., and Ocean Marine Insurance Co., Ltd.

The parents of a deceased derrick hand, Randy Seger, brought a wrongful death action against Diatom Drilling Co., the owner of the rig where their son died. Diatom's commercial general liability (CGL) insurers, Yorkshire Insurance Co. and Ocean Marine Insurance Co., refused to defend, citing lack of coverage. After obtaining a judgment against Diatom, Randy's parents, Roy Seger and Shirley Faye Hoskins (the Segers), filed a Stowers action against the insurers. The central issue was whether Randy was a 'leased-in worker,' which would exclude coverage under Diatom's CGL policy. A jury initially found he was not, but on appeal, this Court, after reviewing the burden of proof for coverage and policy exclusions, determined that the evidence conclusively established Randy was a 'leased-in worker' as a matter of law. Consequently, coverage was precluded, and the Stowers action failed, affirming the court of appeals' judgment that the Segers take nothing.

Insurance CoverageStowers ActionLeased-in Worker ExclusionCommercial General Liability (CGL) PolicyWrongful DeathBurden of ProofLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceObiter DictumVoidable ContractsSurplus Lines Insurance
References
48
Case No. ADJ2057251
Regular
Nov 06, 2012

Santos Acevedo vs. Del Mar Die Casting Co., State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns a cumulative trauma injury resulting in a stroke for applicant Santos Acevedo. A WCJ awarded home care services and modifications, finding the applicant in need of 9 hours of non-skilled assistance daily. Both the applicant and defendant State Compensation Insurance Fund sought reconsideration of this award. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow further study of the factual and legal issues, aiming for a just and reasoned decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDel Mar Die Casting Co.State Compensation Insurance FundSantos AcevedoHome Care IssuePetition for ReconsiderationCumulative Trauma InjuryStrokeHome Health Care AssistantIndustrial Injury
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mustang Pipeline Co. v. Driver Pipeline Co.

This case concerns a breach of contract dispute between Mustang Pipeline Co. (Mustang) and Driver Pipeline Co. (Driver) regarding a pipeline construction project. Mustang sued Driver for failing to complete work timely, while Driver counterclaimed for wrongful termination. The jury initially found both parties breached, but the Supreme Court of Texas clarified that an express jury finding on materiality is not required when 'time is of the essence,' determining Driver's breach was material as a matter of law. This discharged Mustang from its obligations, invalidating the wrongful termination claim. However, Mustang failed to provide sufficient evidence that its claimed damages were reasonable and necessary. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court's judgment for Driver, rendered judgment that Driver take nothing, and reversed the award of attorney's fees to Driver, upholding the denial of damages to Mustang.

Breach of ContractMaterial BreachTime is of the EssenceWrongful TerminationContract DamagesReasonableness of CostsAttorney's FeesJury InstructionsAffirmative DefenseJudgment Notwithstanding Verdict
References
12
Case No. 07-05-0386-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 17, 2007

Yorkshire Insurance Co. v. Diatom Drilling Co.

Insurers (Yorkshire Insurance Co., Ltd. and Ocean Marine Insurance Co., Ltd.) appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Diatom Drilling Co. and Employer’s Contractor Services, Inc. Insurers sought declaratory relief regarding a CGL policy's exclusion of liability for injury or death to "leased-in employees/workers." The case stems from a 1992 accident where Randall Jay Seger, an employee leased by ECS to Diatom, was killed. The appellate court found that the "Excluding Leased-In Employees/Workers" condition unambiguously excludes claims against Diatom/ECS related to such workers. The court reversed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Diatom and ECS and rendered summary judgment for the Insurers, declaring the exclusion valid. The award of attorney's fees to Diatom and ECS was also reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

Insurance policyDeclaratory judgmentSummary judgmentCGL policyLeased employeesWorker injuryCoverage disputePolicy exclusionAttorney's feesAppellate review
References
14
Case No. 04-19-00058-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 31, 2019

HEB Grocery Company L.P. v. Maria Del Rosario Del Cid

Juan Del Cid Castillo sued HEB Grocery Company, L.P. for negligence after sustaining workplace injuries. His wife, Maria Del Rosario Del Cid, filed a derivative loss of consortium claim within the same lawsuit. HEB moved to compel arbitration for Juan's claim and to stay Maria's claim, citing an arbitration agreement signed by Juan. The trial court granted arbitration for Juan but denied HEB's motion to stay Maria's claim. HEB appealed this denial. The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio determined that Maria's loss of consortium claim is derivative, shares operative facts, and is inherently inseparable from Juan's arbitration claim, thus falling under the mandatory stay provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's order and remanded the case, directing the trial court to stay all proceedings related to Maria's claim pending the outcome of Juan's arbitration.

ArbitrationFederal Arbitration ActLoss of ConsortiumNegligenceStay of ProceedingsInterlocutory AppealDerivative ClaimNon-SignatoryAbuse of DiscretionTexas Civil Practice and Remedies Code
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 7,066 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