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

Sun Trading Distributing Co. v. Evidence Music, Inc.

Plaintiff Sun Trading Distributing Co., doing business as Muse Records and Landmark Records, filed a lawsuit against Evidence Music, Inc. and Kenwood Electronics Corp. alleging unfair competition under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act and New York State common law. The core of the complaint revolved around the defendants' alleged unauthorized exploitation of sound recordings by jazz artists John Hicks, Edward “Sonny” Stitt, and Antoine Roney. Sun Trading claimed false designation of origin (reverse passing off) for the Stitt recording and false advertising for the Roney recording, leading to consumer confusion. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the Lanham Act claims, finding insufficient evidence of actual or likelihood of consumer confusion. Consequently, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice, and denied the plaintiff's cross-motion to amend the complaint.

Lanham ActUnfair CompetitionTrademark InfringementCopyrightSound RecordingsJazz MusicConsumer ConfusionSummary JudgmentSupplemental JurisdictionBreach of Contract
References
23
Case No. 2020-020384
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 04, 2021

Hibbitts, Greg v. Kim Royal dba Royal Guttering

Mr. Hibbitts filed a second Request for an Expedited Hearing on the Record, seeking medical and temporary benefits for alleged injuries sustained on July 15, 2020. He worked as a laborer for Royal Guttering and fell from a roof while instructing a co-worker. Royal Guttering did not have workers’ compensation insurance at the time of the injury. Despite providing uncontroverted evidence of his fall and hospital visit, Mr. Hibbitts failed to provide medical records documenting the injury, treatment, or need for continued medical care, nor any evidence of temporary disability. Consequently, the Court denied his request for medical and temporary disability benefits.

Expedited HearingTemporary BenefitsMedical BenefitsWorkers' Compensation InsuranceLaborer InjuryFall from RoofDisability BenefitsProof of InjuryMedical RecordsTennessee Law
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 27, 1975

Nelson v. Dumpson

The court annulled the determination by the State Commissioner of Social Services, which had affirmed the New York City commissioner's decision to recoup an overpayment of public assistance from the petitioner. The overpayment was due to the inclusion of the petitioner's son, Frank, in the budget while he was outside the household. The initial determination was based on section 348.4 of the regulations of the State Department of Social Services (18 NYCRR 348.4), concerning 'suspected fraud' requiring evidence of willful withholding of information. However, the record from the fair hearing lacked substantial evidence to establish willful withholding or fraud. The petitioner testified to disclosing Frank's absence, and respondent's records did not contradict this. This annulment does not preclude the respondent from seeking relief for overpayment due to honest mistake.

public assistanceoverpaymentrecoupmentwillful withholdingfraudfair hearingsocial services regulationssubstantial evidenceannulmentremand
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mayfield v. Employers Reinsurance Corp.

Calvin A. Mayfield claimed a July 24, 1973, injury while working for Texas Tubular Products, which was appealed by their insurer, Employers Reinsurance Corporation. The case centered on the admissibility of evidence regarding Mayfield's prior injuries and the sufficiency of evidence to support the jury's finding that he was not injured on the date in question. Mayfield's treating physician linked his condition to the 1973 injury, while the defense introduced evidence of other injuries and testimony suggesting no injury occurred on July 24, 1973. The jury found Mayfield was not injured, leading to a take-nothing judgment, which the appellate court affirmed, finding no error in the admission of evidence or the jury's finding.

Workmen's CompensationAdmissibility of EvidenceOther InjuriesSole Producing CauseJury FindingSufficiency of EvidencePrior ClaimsSettlementsLump Sum RecoveryHardship
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State v. Hart

Doyle Hart was convicted of aggravated rape and incest. His stepdaughter, B.J., later recanted her trial testimony, leading Hart to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis for a new trial based on this newly discovered evidence. The trial court denied the petition, citing B.J.'s reassertion of her original testimony while in a mental health facility and the results of an unfavorable polygraph examination taken by Hart. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed and remanded the case for a new evidentiary hearing. The appellate court found that the trial court improperly considered evidence outside the record, specifically B.J.'s post-hearing statements and the polygraph results, violating principles of judicial procedure and evidence.

Aggravated RapeIncestRecanted TestimonyWrit of Error Coram NobisNewly Discovered EvidenceJudicial MisconductEvidence Outside RecordPolygraph ExaminationCredibility AssessmentChild Abuse
References
33
Case No. E2003-00053-CCA-R3-CD
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 07, 2003

State of Tennessee v. Tammy Hart

Defendant Tammy Hart was indicted and convicted in Johnson County Criminal Court for child endangerment, vehicular homicide, and aggravated vehicular homicide following a head-on collision that resulted in a fatality. The trial court merged the vehicular homicide conviction into the aggravated vehicular homicide conviction and sentenced Hart to consecutive terms. On direct appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee at Knoxville, Hart raised four issues: the denial of her motion to suppress medical records, the admission of those records into evidence, a violation of her constitutional right to confrontation, and the insufficiency of evidence to sustain her convictions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgments, concluding that the State did not violate Hart's Fourth Amendment rights in subpoenaing her medical records, the records were admissible as business records, her confrontation rights were not violated due to waiver and ample cross-examination opportunities, and sufficient evidence supported the aggravated vehicular homicide and child endangerment convictions, citing her intoxication and prior DUI history.

Child EndangermentVehicular HomicideAggravated Vehicular HomicideDUIIntoxicationMedical RecordsSuppression MotionFourth AmendmentRight to ConfrontationSufficiency of Evidence
References
34
Case No. Motion sequence Nos. 002 and 005
Regular Panel Decision

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Escape Media Group, Inc.

UMG Recordings, Inc. sued Escape Media Group, Inc. for common-law copyright infringement and unfair competition. Escape asserted DMCA safe harbor and CDA preemption defenses, along with Donnelly Act and tortious interference counterclaims. The court denied UMG's motion to dismiss the DMCA safe harbor defense, ruling it applies to pre-1972 recordings. However, the court granted UMG's motion to dismiss the CDA preemption defense, clarifying that the CDA's intellectual property exemption covers both federal and state laws. Additionally, Escape's Donnelly Act counterclaim was dismissed, but UMG's motions to dismiss the tortious interference counterclaims were denied, rejecting defenses like the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and economic interest.

Copyright InfringementDMCA Safe HarborPre-1972 RecordingsUnfair CompetitionCommunications Decency ActTortious InterferenceDonnelly ActNew York Common LawInternet Service ProvidersAntitrust
References
34
Case No. ADJ9292894
Regular
Jul 20, 2018

ELMER G. ARCHILA-GRACIA vs. GREENVIEW LANDSCAPE AND DESIGN LLC, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer: The WCAB granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior order disallowing a lien claim due to a lack of record. The trial judge found no jurisdiction because no evidence of an employment relationship was adduced, but the Appeals Board found the record lacked required findings, evidence summaries, and admitted evidence. Consequently, the matter was returned to the trial level to develop the record on the employment issue and adjudicate the lien claim.

WCABLien ClaimantReconsiderationFindings and OrderJurisdictionEmployment RelationshipLabor Code Section 5313Substantial EvidenceDue ProcessDevelop the Record
References
8
Case No. ADJ1252927 (GRO 0027206)
Regular
Apr 16, 2013

DINA VILLAREAL vs. BEBE FARMS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration of its prior decision that found the applicant 100% permanently disabled. The defendant argued that the vocational expert's opinion was not substantial evidence and requested the case be remanded for further development of the record. However, the WCAB affirmed that parties must diligently develop the record before discovery closes, and it is not the Board's role to supplement a party's deficient evidence. Substantial evidence in the existing record supported the permanent total disability finding.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDADJ1252927GRO 0027206Dina VillarealBebe Farms Inc.State Compensation Insurance FundReconsideration DeniedPermanent Total DisabilityVocational ExpertAnn Wallace PhD
References
6
Case No. 2017-03-0637
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2018

Elliott, Mark v. Heritage Food Services, Inc. d/b/a Heritage Grill

Mark Elliott filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking additional medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits following a hyper-extension injury at work. The Court sustained objections from the employer, Heritage Food Services, Inc., regarding the admissibility of Mr. Elliott's affidavits, email communications, and medical records due to hearsay and lack of proper authentication. Consequently, much of Mr. Elliott's submitted evidence was not considered. The Court found that Mr. Elliott failed to present sufficient admissible medical evidence to prove a causal connection between his employment and the need for treatment, or to demonstrate a disability due to a work-related injury. Therefore, his requests for additional medical treatment, outstanding medical charges, mileage expenses, and temporary disability benefits were denied.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingBenefit DenialMedical BenefitsTemporary Total DisabilityCausationAdmissibility of EvidenceHearsayAuthenticationTennessee Law
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 18,369 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