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. 03-07-00014-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2007

Quintin Joseph Carruthers v. State

Appellant Quintin Joseph Carruthers pleaded guilty to burglary of a habitation and was sentenced to twenty years in prison, along with a $4,000 restitution order. Appellant appealed, arguing there was no factual basis in the record for the restitution amount. The court reviewed the victim's testimony which identified stolen items and confirmed a total loss of $4,000. The appellate court concluded that the victim's testimony provided an adequate factual basis for the restitution order. The judgment of conviction was affirmed.

BurglaryRestitutionFactual BasisCriminal ProcedureSentencingAppellate ReviewWitness TestimonyProperty LossTexas Penal CodeTexas Code of Criminal Procedure
References
6
Case No. 2021-01-0733
Regular Panel Decision
May 25, 2022

Watson, Kenneth v. Amazon.com Services, LLC

The employee, a warehouse worker, reported experiencing neck pain while operating a reach truck and looking up repetitively. After reporting his symptoms to the employer, the employee was evaluated by a panel-selected physician, who recommended surgery but concluded the employee’s cervical spine condition did not arise primarily out of the employment. Thereafter, the employer filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting it had negated an essential element of the employee’s claim and had established the employee’s evidence of causation was insufficient as a matter of law. In response, the employee attacked the factual basis of the physician’s causation opinion but did not offer a countervailing expert opinion. The trial court denied the employer’s motion for summary judgment, concluding the employee had raised one or more genuine issues of material fact concerning the factual basis of the physician’s causation opinion, and the employer appealed. We affirm the trial court’s order and remand the case.

Workers' CompensationSummary JudgmentCausationMedical OpinionExpert WitnessNeck InjuryRepetitive MotionOccupational DiseaseTrial Court RulingAppeals Board Review
References
9
Case No. 05-10-00152-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2012

In Re CPY

The core issue in this appeal is the interpretation of the phrase 'full time basis' within a divorce decree, which governs the termination of contractual alimony obligations. Appellant Lisa Davis Wells challenged a summary judgment ruling that had deemed her to be working on a full-time basis, thereby ending alimony payments from appellee Lawrence Ray Youst. The Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas, determined that the term 'full time basis' was ambiguous because it lacked a clear and definite meaning within the decree or various statutory contexts. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial to resolve the factual question of the parties' original intent.

AlimonyDivorce DecreeContract InterpretationAmbiguitySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewFamily LawTexas LawRemandContractual Obligation
References
18
Case No. GA-0561
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 14, 2007

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Under the terms of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, a pool hall may operate on a BYOB ("bring your own bottle") basis without a permit or license from the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. Moreover, the City of Corsicana may not by municipal ordinance regulate the possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages within a pool hall that operates on a BYOB basis.

BYOB regulationAlcoholic Beverage CodeMunicipal ordinancesState preemption doctrinePool hall operationsAlcoholic beverage licensingPermit requirementsDry areasWet areasPrivate club status
References
3
Case No. ADJ11136346, ADJ10857795
Regular
Mar 08, 2019

IRMA NELSON vs. SAFEWAY/ALBERTSON'S HOLDINGS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for disqualification against a WCJ. The petition failed to provide specific, factual allegations under penalty of perjury to support claims of bias or an expressed opinion on the merits. Because the petition lacked the required factual basis under Labor Code section 5311 and relevant procedural rules, it was insufficient to warrant disqualification.

Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJLabor Code Section 5311Code of Civil Procedure Section 641unqualified opinionbiasenmityWCAB Rule 10452affidavit
References
6
Case No. ADJ809010 (LAO 0877737)
Regular
Feb 28, 2012

Jessica Leaser vs. Washington Mutual, Zurich North America, SRS/SEDGWICK Claims Management Services

The Appeals Board dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as untimely, as it was filed three days after the statutory deadline. Although the administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a notice of intent to sanction the lien claimant for proceeding to trial without a legal basis, the Board granted removal on its own motion. The Board rescinded the sanctions, finding the WCJ's assessment of "no factual or legal basis" unsupported on the current record, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely PetitionJurisdictional Time LimitsRemoval on Board MotionMonetary SanctionsNotice of Intention to Impose SanctionsRescinded SanctionsLien ClaimantClaims Administrator
References
4
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 04379 [32 NY3d 982]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 14, 2018

Matter of Natasha W. v. New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.

The Court of Appeals reversed an Appellate Division order, dismissing the petition in a case where Natasha W. was placed on the Child Abuse Register for attempted shoplifting with her five-year-old child. The Court found a rational basis for the Administrative Law Judge's conclusion that the child was in imminent risk of impairment due to maltreatment and that Natasha W.'s actions were relevant to childcare employment. The dissent argued that there was no 'imminent danger' as required by statute and that the ALJ's prediction of future harm was speculative and lacked factual basis, criticizing the majority for creating a per se rule of neglect without specific proof of harm.

Child MaltreatmentShoplifting IncidentAdministrative ReviewRational Basis TestArbitrary and CapriciousImminent DangerChild Neglect DefinitionFamily Court ActSocial Services LawChild Abuse Register
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Travis v. Freedman

This personal injury lawsuit was filed under New York Labor Law 240 and 241 after a plaintiff fell from a spackle bucket during construction at a one-family home owned by Judith Freedman. The defendants, Herbert and Judith Freedman, moved for summary judgment, asserting the single-family dwelling exception to strict liability under the Labor Law, as they did not direct or control the work. The court initially granted summary judgment, dismissing all claims against them. Upon reconsideration, while acknowledging factual disputes, the court reaffirmed its previous decision, finding no adequate factual basis for the plaintiff's claims of ordinary negligence or malicious conduct to overcome the summary judgment and strict liability exemption for homeowners.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentNew York Labor LawHomeowner LiabilityStrict LiabilityConstruction AccidentDiversity JurisdictionReconsiderationOne-Family Dwelling ExceptionFall from Height
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General of US

This is an action brought by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), the Young Socialist Alliance (YSA), and certain individuals against President Nixon and various government officials. The plaintiffs allege a conspiracy to deprive them of their rights to participate in the electoral process, and accuse defendants of illegal burglary, mail tampering, and other wrongful activities. Defendants Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Mardian moved for dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction. The court found no factual basis to connect these defendants with alleged tortious acts in New York, such as a burglary, a mail cover, or an FBI Disruption Program. Consequently, the court granted the motions to dismiss without prejudice, allowing plaintiffs to refile if they can establish a jurisdictional basis.

Personal JurisdictionMotion to DismissConspiracyCivil RightsGovernment SurveillanceMail TamperingBurglaryPolitical HarassmentWhite House OfficialsFBI
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Saur v. M & M Transportation

The case involves an appeal regarding the actuarial computation of present value and interest payable to the Aggregate Trust Fund under the Workers' Compensation Law. The Workers' Compensation Board made several recomputations and assessments for interest against an employer and its insurance carrier. The insurer objected, disputing the basis for interest payments prior to a specific directive. The appellate court reviewed the Board's decision, particularly its determination of the present value computation date. The court ultimately found the Board's decision to be erroneous as a matter of law, lacking statutory or factual basis. Consequently, the court reversed the decision, awarded costs to the employer and insurance carrier, and remitted the matter back to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with its ruling.

Actuarial computationPresent valueAggregate Trust FundWorkers' Compensation LawInterest assessmentStatutory interpretationAppellate reviewRemittitur
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 3,696 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