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

Kwitek v. United States Postal Service

Edward Kwitek, a driver for Midwest Transport, Inc., sued the United States Postal Service (USPS) under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for injuries sustained while loading mail at a post office, alleging negligence by USPS employees. The government moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, asserting that Kwitek was an independent contractor and his injury resulted from a discretionary function, thereby making the FTCA's waiver of sovereign immunity inapplicable. The court denied the government's motion. It ruled that the independent contractor exception did not apply because the alleged negligence was on the part of USPS employees failing to perform their regular duties. Furthermore, the discretionary function exception was also inapplicable, as the alleged conduct was not policy-driven but rather a failure to follow established protocol. The case was then referred for a settlement conference.

Federal Tort Claims ActSovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionIndependent Contractor ExceptionDiscretionary Function ExceptionNegligenceUnited States Postal ServicePersonal InjuryLoading Dock InjuryMotion to Dismiss
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cooley v. United States

On December 8, 1981, six coal miners died in a methane gas explosion at the Grundy Mining Company in Whitwell, Tennessee. Their estates, represented by their widows and administratrix, sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), alleging negligence by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). Plaintiffs claimed MSHA employees were negligent in approving unsafe ventilation plans, failing to conduct adequate inspections, and failing to enforce safety standards, leading to the miners' deaths. The United States moved to dismiss, asserting sovereign immunity under the FTCA's discretionary function exception. The court analyzed MSHA's statutory and regulatory authority, concluding that MSHA inspectors exercised significant discretion in their duties, and their actions were grounded in governmental policy. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the court found that the discretionary function exception applied, barring the plaintiffs' claims. Consequently, the complaints were dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Mine SafetyMethane Gas ExplosionFederal Tort Claims ActDiscretionary Function ExceptionSovereign ImmunityFederal Mine Safety and Health ActMSHAVentilation PlansSafety ViolationsWrongful Death
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cazales v. Lecon, Inc.

Rogelio Cazales was fatally electrocuted at the Houston National Veteran’s Administration Cemetery while excavating for a water line. His family (the Cazaleses) and Le-con, Inc., the general contractor, filed a wrongful death and survival action and a third-party claim, respectively, against the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The VA moved for summary judgment, asserting sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), specifically invoking the discretionary function exception. The court granted the VA's motion, ruling that the VA's decisions regarding the contractual delegation of worker safety responsibility to Lecon, and its limited safety inspections, were discretionary functions grounded in public policy and thus protected from suit under the FTCA, regardless of alleged negligence.

Summary JudgmentSovereign ImmunityFederal Tort Claims ActDiscretionary Function ExceptionGovernment Contractor LiabilityWorkplace AccidentWrongful Death ClaimGovernment Agency ResponsibilityFederal JurisdictionTort Claim
References
78
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Abrams-Fogliani v. United States

Jennifer Abrams-Fogliani sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act for personal injuries sustained while ascending allegedly uneven stairs at the Fort Totten Army Base in Queens, New York. The government moved for summary judgment, arguing lack of subject matter jurisdiction on two grounds: that the City of New York, as lessee of the building, was an independent contractor, and that the claim was barred by the discretionary function exception to the FTCA. The court found that the City was indeed an independent contractor, precluding vicarious liability on the part of the government. Furthermore, the court concluded that the Army's decision to lease the property and delegate maintenance, as well as its subsequent supervision, constituted discretionary functions protected from suit. Consequently, the government's motion for summary judgment was granted, and the action was dismissed in its entirety.

Federal Tort Claims ActFTCADiscretionary Function ExceptionIndependent ContractorSovereign ImmunityPremises LiabilityLease AgreementGovernment LiabilitySummary JudgmentPersonal Injury
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Totten v. United States

This is a wrongful death action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The plaintiff's husband, an Aerojet employee, died in a rocket propellant fire during a post-accident clean-up operation at the United States Air Force Arnold Engineering Development Center. The United States moved for summary judgment, contending it could not be held liable for the negligence of its independent contractor Aerojet and that it was protected by the discretionary function exception of 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a). The Court determined that Air Force personnel, who approved a clean-up plan with a deficient hazard analysis, were performing a discretionary function. Citing Supreme Court precedents like Dalehite and Varig Airlines, the Court ruled that Section 2680(a) protects the United States from liability even if negligence could be proved. Therefore, the motion for summary judgment was granted, and the action was dismissed.

Wrongful DeathFederal Tort Claims ActDiscretionary Function ExceptionSummary JudgmentGovernment LiabilityIndependent ContractorMilitary StandardsHazard AnalysisRocket Propellant FireTennessee Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tremblay v. United States

Plaintiff Thomas A. Tremblay sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries sustained during pilot training, alleging FAA inspector Rick Taylor negligently instructed him to jump from an airplane exit. The United States moved to dismiss, arguing the claims were barred by the discretionary function exception to the FTCA. The Court granted the motion, finding that FAA decisions regarding training programs, supervision, and regulation were discretionary and immune from judicial review. It also determined that Taylor's instruction fell within this protected discretion. Thus, Plaintiff's claims were dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Federal Tort Claims ActDiscretionary Function ExceptionSovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionFederal Aviation AdministrationAirline TrainingPilot SafetyGovernment NegligenceMotion to DismissPersonal Injury
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fisko v. U.S. General Services Administration

This case concerns a motion to dismiss filed by the United States of America against plaintiffs Barbara Fisko and Matthew Cardinale, who sought damages for personal injuries Fisko sustained due to a defective sidewalk and drainage cover at the World Trade Center Plaza. The plaintiffs alleged negligence by the government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The court granted the government's motion, ruling that the maintenance of the premises was delegated to Eastco Building Services, Inc., an independent contractor. Consequently, the FTCA's independent contractor exception precluded holding the government liable. Furthermore, the court found that claims of negligent supervision or selection of contractors were barred by the FTCA's discretionary function exception, leading to a dismissal of the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Federal Tort Claims ActIndependent Contractor ExceptionDiscretionary Function ExceptionSovereign ImmunityPersonal InjuryNegligencePremises LiabilityWorld Trade CenterSidewalk DefectDrainage Cover
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brotman v. United States

The Brotmans sued the United States Government and the Statue of Liberty Ellis Island Foundation, Inc. for personal injury, alleging insufficient lighting and lack of warning signs caused Mrs. Brotman's fall on a stairway. The Government moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, invoking the discretionary function exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The court examined whether the National Park Service's (NPS) decisions regarding lighting design and warning signs were discretionary and based on policy considerations, balancing safety with historic preservation goals. Concluding that NPS's decisions involved policy judgments to preserve the monument's historic character, the court granted the Government's motion to dismiss. As a result, all claims against both the Government and the Foundation were dismissed.

Federal Tort Claims ActDiscretionary Function ExceptionSovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionHistoric PreservationNational Park ServiceStatue of LibertyPremises LiabilityGovernmental ImmunityNegligence Claim
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

MALECHE v. Solis

Vincent Maleche, representing himself, sued Hilda Solis, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), following the denial of his Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA) benefits after Hurricane Ike. Maleche, a self-employed resident of Galveston County, Texas, alleged denial of benefits and discrimination under the Stafford Act. His DUA application was initially denied by the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC), a decision upheld by the TWC’s Appeal Tribunal and the DOL’s Regional Administrator, citing his unavailability for work prior to the disaster. Judge Sim Lake granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, ruling that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Stafford Act's discretionary function exception, which shields discretionary agency eligibility determinations from judicial review. The court also found the DOL's decision was not arbitrary and dismissed the discrimination claims due to insufficient evidence.

Disaster Unemployment AssistanceStafford ActSovereign ImmunityJudicial ReviewSummary JudgmentFederal CourtUnemployment BenefitsAdministrative LawDiscretionary Function ExceptionDiscrimination Claim
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Continental Casualty Insurance Co. v. Functional Restoration Associates

Continental Casualty Insurance Company (Continental) sought judicial review after the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission (Commission) affirmed a decision holding Continental liable for medical treatment costs provided by Functional Restoration Associates (FRA) and Productive Rehabilitation Institute of Dallas for Ergonomics (PRIDE) to an injured employee. The trial court dismissed Continental's suit, citing a lack of statutory basis for judicial review of the Division of Medical Review (DMR) decisions. On appeal, Continental argued for both statutory and inherent rights to judicial review. The appellate court found no explicit or implied statutory right but concluded that Continental had an inherent right to judicial review because the Commission's decision affected Continental’s vested property interest (money). The court also rejected the Commission's argument regarding untimely filing. Consequently, the court reversed the dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine if the Commission's decision was arbitrary and capricious or unsupported by substantial evidence.

Judicial ReviewMedical Benefits DisputeWorkers' CompensationAdministrative LawDue ProcessProperty RightsStatutory InterpretationRemandTexas LawAppellate Court
References
30
Showing 1-10 of 1,973 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