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

National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburg v. Jones

This case involves an appeal by National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (National Union) against an order of sanctions for abuse of discovery. The original suit was filed by Jones, appealing an industrial accident board award in a worker’s compensation claim. The trial court sanctioned National Union for evasive responses to discovery requests, ordering them to respond to admissions and pay $1,200 in attorneys' fees. On appeal, the court found that National Union had not waived its right to appeal the sanctions due to an explicit reservation in the agreed judgment. The court affirmed the trial court's order of sanctions, finding no abuse of discretion, and also denied Jones' cross-point seeking damages for a frivolous appeal.

Discovery AbuseSanctionsAppellate ReviewWorkers' CompensationAttorneys' FeesDue ProcessWaiver of AppealFrivolous AppealTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureTexas Rules of Appellate Procedure
References
10
Case No. ADJ7104576
Regular
Mar 09, 2012

DEVEL MOORE vs. GAMEWORKS/SEGA AMERICA, INC., MITSUI SUMIMOTO INSURANCE GROUP, MITSUI SUMIMOTO MARINE MANAGEMENT

Lien claimants improperly petitioned for reconsideration of an interlocutory order denying discovery, which is not a final order subject to reconsideration. The Appeals Board dismissed the petition and granted removal on its own motion to address the discovery dispute. The Board also issued a notice of intention to impose sanctions against the lien claimants and their counsel for bad-faith, frivolous actions and unprofessional conduct. Sanctions may be imposed up to $2,500 unless good cause is shown otherwise.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationLien ClaimantsDiscovery RequestsFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderRemovalSanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Bad Faith
References
7
Case No. A.P. 195-1539-352
Regular Panel Decision

Shapiro v. Halberstram (In Re Halberstram)

This bankruptcy court decision addresses two motions: the Debtor-Defendant's motion to dismiss an 11 U.S.C. § 523 adversary proceeding and the Plaintiffs' motion for sanctions due to discovery non-compliance. The Debtor-Defendant sought dismissal based on procedural irregularities in the summons and complaint, including an incorrect case number, lack of required information, and an unsigned complaint. The court acknowledged the defects but ruled that the Debtor-Defendant's timely answer and active participation without objection constituted a waiver of the service issues. It also found that the deficiencies in the complaint were technical and not fatal, especially since the initial counsel was already sanctioned. Ultimately, both motions were denied, and the court urged the Plaintiffs to obtain new counsel and proceed with discovery to reach the merits of the dispute.

Bankruptcy LawAdversary ProceedingMotion to DismissSanctionsProcedural DefectsSummonsComplaintWaiver of ServicePersonal JurisdictionSubject Matter Jurisdiction
References
19
Case No. ADJ9391781 ADJ9392135 ADJ9391782
Regular
Oct 14, 2018

DAWN WORTH vs. DEPARTMENT OF STATE HOSPITALS COALINGA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration to address potential sanctions. The defendant contended the WCJ erred by barring defense witnesses as a discovery sanction and violating due process. The Board issued a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions of $500 against the defendant and its attorney, Ben McGriff, due to alleged bad-faith actions and disrespectful language toward the WCJ in the Petition. The Board is seeking objections to the sanctions before making a final decision on the merits of the petition.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationStatute of LimitationsDiscovery SanctionDue ProcessLabor Code § 5813WCAB Rule 10561Bad Faith ActionsFrivolous TacticsUnnecessary Delay
References
0
Case No. ADJ9392135 (MF), ADJ9391782, ADJ9391781
Regular
Nov 08, 2018

DAWN WORTH vs. DEPARTMENT OF STATE HOSPITALS COALINGA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a finding that applicant Dawn Worth sustained industrial back injuries, rejecting the defendant's statute of limitations defense. The Board also imposed $500 in sanctions jointly against the defendant State Compensation Insurance Fund and its attorney, Ben McGriff, for bad-faith actions. These sanctions were due to frivolous language in the defendant's petition that impugned the Workers' Compensation Judge's integrity. The exclusion of defense witnesses was upheld as a proper discovery sanction for the defendant's failure to produce requested statements.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSanctionsLabor Code section 5813WCAB Rule 10561Bad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsUnnecessary delayDiscovery sanctionDue processStatute of limitations
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jaques v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n

Lorenzo Jaques, injured at work, faced a lawsuit from his employer's carrier, Texas Employers’ Insurance Association (TEIA), after an Industrial Accident Board award. During discovery, Jaques objected to several interrogatories, leading to a court order compelling him to answer and pay attorney's fees. Jaques failed to comply with this order, resulting in TEIA's motion for sanctions. The trial court subsequently struck Jaques's pleadings and dismissed his case with prejudice, despite his requests for oral hearings. On appeal, the higher court found the severe sanctions to be an abuse of discretion, emphasizing that lesser sanctions should have been considered first, and thus reversed the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationDiscovery SanctionsPleadings StrickenDismissal with PrejudiceAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewInterrogatoriesFailure to ComplyTrial Court OrderLesser Sanctions
References
2
Case No. ADJ4221124 (SFO 0508133)
Regular
Jun 19, 2012

THEMAS OLSON (Deceased); VICTORIA OLSON (Widow) vs. CITY OF VACAVILLE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an intermediate discovery order, finding it was not a final order. The Board granted the defendant's petition for removal solely to address potential sanctions against their counsel, George Fögy, and his firm, Stockwell, Harris, Woolverton & Muehl. This notice of intent to sanction stems from alleged misrepresentations within the defendant's petition regarding the origin of Exhibit 1 and the explanation for settlement discrepancies. The Board is giving Fögy and his firm an opportunity to show cause why sanctions up to $2,500 should not be imposed.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Civil Asbestos SettlementExhibit 1In Camera ReviewWork ProductPrivilege Waiver
References
8
Case No. 814 S.W.2d 389
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 1992

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Abascal

This is a dissenting opinion by Justice Butts concerning the imposition of severe discovery sanctions against Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company in a workers' compensation action initiated by Raul Flores, Jr. The trial court struck Hartford's affirmative defenses and ordered a $10,000 payment for discovery abuse, a decision which the majority of the appellate court affirmed. Justice Butts argues that this sanction is unjust and violates constitutional due process principles outlined in *TransAmerican Natural Gas Corp. v. Powell*. He contends that such extreme sanctions, which preclude a party from presenting its case, are only warranted by flagrant bad faith or refusal to produce material evidence, a condition not met as Hartford ultimately complied with discovery orders. The dissent asserts that lesser sanctions would have been more appropriate and that the majority's holding could foster 'sanctions gamesmanship'.

Discovery SanctionsDue ProcessWorkers' CompensationAffirmative DefensesTrial Court DiscretionMandamusAppellate ReviewFlagrant Bad FaithTexas LawCivil Procedure
References
25
Case No. 03-15-00384-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2015

Crystal Bingham Hernandez v. Tiffany Polley

Appellant Crystal Bingham Hernandez filed a lawsuit claiming damages from a motor vehicle collision, asserting a negligent entrustment claim against Appellee Tiffany Polley. The trial court granted Polley's motion to dismiss as a 'death penalty' sanction for alleged discovery abuse, dismissing all of Hernandez's claims against Polley. Hernandez is appealing this dismissal, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing the severe sanction without first considering lesser sanctions and by failing to specify the exact discovery failures. She contends she made good faith efforts to comply with discovery orders and that her case's merits should not be prejudiced by the sanction.

Discovery SanctionsDeath Penalty SanctionsAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ProcedureMotion to DismissNegligent EntrustmentMotor Vehicle CollisionInsurance DisputeTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureDue Process Violation
References
17
Case No. ADJ8237465
Regular
Jun 07, 2013

FABIAN HERNANDEZ vs. RBI FRAMING, DYNAMIC CLAIMS SERVICES, INC.

This case involves sanctions against applicant's counsel for filing a petition for reconsideration without justification and attempting improper discovery after submission. The Board found that counsel's arguments were disingenuous and failed to show good cause for their actions. Consequently, applicant's counsel was ordered to pay a $1,500 sanction jointly and severally.

WCABReconsiderationSanctionsLabor Code § 5813Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10561Applicant's CounselLaw Offices of Robin JacobsInc.Robin JacobsEsq.
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 2,976 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