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. 2015 NY Slip Op 06751
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 08, 2015

All State Flooring Distributors, L.P. v. MD Floors, LLC

Plaintiff, All State Flooring Distributors, L.P., initiated legal action against MD Floors, LLC, and Michael Savino to recover $48,188.50 for wood flooring delivered. MD Floors, in turn, filed counterclaims asserting that it incurred additional labor costs due to faulty flooring and was subjected to double-billing. The Supreme Court initially denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, citing both a procedural default and the presence of triable issues of fact. On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the denial of summary judgment, while correcting the Supreme Court's finding of a procedural default. The Appellate Division concurred that substantial triable issues of fact existed regarding partial payments, attorney's fees, and the alleged personal guaranty by Savino, and also affirmed the existence of triable issues concerning MD Floors' counterclaims for additional labor costs and double-billing.

Summary JudgmentBreach of ContractPersonal GuarantyCounterclaimsProcedural DefaultAppellate ReviewTriable Issues of FactAttorney's FeesCommercial LawContract Dispute
References
3
Case No. 2017-06-0419
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 07, 2018

Lipske, David v. Adam's Wood Flooring, a/k/a Adam's Hardwood Flooring

David Lipske, the employee, filed a Request for Expedited Hearing claiming a work injury while allegedly employed by Adam's Hardwood Flooring. The employer, represented by Adam Shaw, denied Lipske's employment, asserting that Mike Shaw, a second cousin, was attempting to start his own business and was not acting on behalf of Adam's Hardwood Flooring. The Court determined that Mr. Lipske failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate he was an employee of Adam's Hardwood Flooring, and therefore, denied his request for medical and temporary disability benefits. A scheduling hearing has been set for future proceedings.

Workers' CompensationEmployment DisputeExpedited HearingIndependent ContractorEmployee StatusScope of EmploymentTemporary DisabilityMedical BenefitsBurden of ProofTennessee Law
References
3
Case No. Docket No. 2020-01-0787; State File No. 108369-2019
Regular Panel Decision
May 06, 2022

Holt, John v. Quality Floor Coverings, LLC

This appeal addresses requests for admissions under Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 36. The employee, John Dickerson Holt, III, failed to timely respond to the employer's, Quality Floor Coverings, LLC, requests. The trial court denied the employer's motion to deem the statements admitted, citing non-compliance with a regulation requiring a good-faith effort to resolve discovery disputes. The Appeals Board reversed this decision in part, clarifying that Rule 36 is self-executing and a good-faith certification is not required when no timely response is served. The Board affirmed that the admitted requests are conclusively established and remanded the case for the trial court to further consider the remaining requests.

Discovery DisputeRequests for AdmissionsProcedural ErrorWorkers' Compensation AppealRule 36Self-executing RuleTrial Court DiscretionRemandTennessee LawAppellate Review
References
6
Case No. 2020-01-0787
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 2022

Holt III, John v. Quality Floor Coverings, LLC

This case involves an interlocutory appeal where the employer, Quality Floor Coverings, LLC, challenged the denial of its summary judgment motion against employee John Dickerson Holt, III. The employer argued that Mr. Holt was ineligible for increased permanent disability benefits due to his incarceration when his initial benefit period concluded. The trial court's denial was affirmed by the Appeals Board, which found the employer failed to provide sufficient material facts regarding the employee's post-injury work status, as required for summary judgment in workers' compensation claims. The Board underscored that an employee's incarceration is merely one factor to consider and that such cases are generally not amenable to summary judgment. Consequently, the case was remanded, with costs taxed to the employer.

Summary Judgment DenialInterlocutory AppealPermanent Disability BenefitsEmployee IncarcerationBurden of ProductionTennessee Rules of Civil ProcedureEnhanced Benefits ClaimMaterial Fact DisputeAppellate Board DecisionWorkers' Comp Law 50-6-207
References
9
Case No. 01-08-00918-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2010

Rasa Floors, LP v. Spring Village Partners, Ltd.

An apartment complex owner (Spring Village Partners, Ltd.) hired a contractor (Rasa Floors, L.P.) to install new flooring. A dispute arose over billing and workmanship, leading Rasa Floors to sue on a sworn account and for breach of contract or quantum meruit, and Spring Village to countersue for breach of contract, warranty, and fraud. A jury found for Spring Village on breach of warranty ($5,000) and for Rasa Floors on quantum meruit ($30,000). The trial court disregarded the quantum meruit finding. The appellate court affirmed the breach of warranty finding, reversed the trial court's disregard of the quantum meruit award, and remanded the case for entry of a new judgment reflecting the offset and for reconsideration of attorney's fees.

Contract DisputeQuantum MeruitBreach of WarrantySworn AccountAttorney's FeesJury VerdictOffset DamagesConstruction LawPleading DefectsAppellate Review
References
14
Case No. 14-03-00263-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 07, 2003

Stephen Adams v. Reynolds Tile & Flooring, Inc.

Stephen Adams, an employee of Reynolds Tile and Flooring, Inc., suffered a back injury while working and subsequently sued his employer for negligence, breach of contract, and Texas Insurance Code violations. Adams alleged that Reynolds failed to provide a safe work environment, adequate assistance, safety equipment, and supervision. Additionally, he claimed Reynolds misrepresented its workers' compensation insurance policy. The trial court initially granted summary judgment in favor of Reynolds. On appeal, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the judgment, concluding that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding both the negligence claims (specifically concerning 'usual' lifting and availability of adequate help) and the breach of contract and Insurance Code claims, thus necessitating further proceedings.

negligencebreach of contractinsurance code violationssummary judgmentworkers' compensation nonsubscriberback injurysafe workplaceforeseeabilityproximate causeemployee safety
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Piazza v. Shaw Contract Flooring Services, Inc.

Plaintiff, an employee of the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority (BMHA), sustained injuries after falling through a hole in an apartment floor while removing trash. BMHA had contracted Shaw Contract Flooring Services, Inc., operating as Spectra Contract Flooring, for flooring work, who in turn subcontracted Gregory Simmons, doing business as Simmons Flooring and Remodeling. After the kitchen floor was noted as "spongy," Simmons cut out portions, creating the hole. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment dismissing common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims. However, the appellate court modified this by denying those parts of the motions and reinstating the claims, finding defendants failed to establish they did not supervise the work, control the premises, or create/have notice of the dangerous condition. Conversely, the court affirmed the dismissal of Labor Law § 241 (6) claims, ruling that the plaintiff's trash removal duties were not connected to construction activities as defined by that statute. The order was thus modified and affirmed.

Personal InjuryNegligenceLabor LawSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityDangerous ConditionConstruction SafetyWorker InjuryAppellate ReviewSubcontractor Liability
References
8
Case No. 01-25-00057-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 2025

In Re Gulf Coast Flooring & Services, Inc. v. the State of Texas

Relator, Gulf Coast Flooring & Services, LLC, sought a writ of mandamus to challenge a trial court's order that denied its plea to the jurisdiction and plea in abatement. The relator argued that the real parties in interest, including the Estate of Alexander Uzcategui, failed to exhaust administrative remedies with the Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers’ Compensation, claiming the division has exclusive jurisdiction over employee versus independent contractor status. A recent Texas Supreme Court decision, Univ. of Tex. Rio Grande Valley v. Oteka, was referenced by both sides, with differing interpretations regarding its impact on the mandamus relief. The Court of Appeals denied the petition for writ of mandamus. However, this denial was without prejudice, allowing the relator to request the probate court to reconsider its ruling in light of the Oteka decision.

Writ of MandamusPlea to the JurisdictionPlea in AbatementAdministrative RemediesWorkers' CompensationExclusive JurisdictionIndependent Contractor StatusEmployee StatusProbate CourtCourt of Appeals
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 08, 2005

Duffy v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Plaintiff sued Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Floor Management, Inc. for personal injuries from a slip and fall on a wet floor inside a Wal-Mart store. Floor Management, a subcontractor for floor cleaning, moved for summary judgment, arguing it had subcontracted its responsibilities to Crystal Clear Nationwide Management and was not actively involved. Wal-Mart cross-moved for contractual indemnification from Floor Management. The Supreme Court denied Floor Management’s motion and partially granted Wal-Mart’s cross-motion, requiring Floor Management to defend Wal-Mart. On cross appeals, the appellate court modified the order, granting Floor Management's motion for summary judgment, finding no liability to plaintiff. The court also granted Wal-Mart's motion for indemnification from Floor Management, applying Arkansas law as per a choice of law provision, and found Floor Management entitled to indemnification from Crystal Clear Nationwide Management.

Personal InjurySlip and FallSummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationSubcontractor LiabilityIndependent ContractorChoice of LawArkansas LawNegligenceAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 27, 1941

Fleming v. Pearson Hardwood Flooring Co.

The court found the defendant corporation, engaged in producing hardwood flooring for interstate commerce, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Violations included failing to pay minimum wages and overtime compensation to its employees, such as a night watchman working 12-hour shifts. The defendant also unlawfully issued non-negotiable scrip in lieu of cash wages and made improper deductions for goods sold to employees. Furthermore, the company failed to maintain accurate payroll and time records as required by federal regulations. Consequently, the court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to the requested relief.

Fair Labor Standards ActMinimum WageOvertime CompensationScrip WagesInterstate CommerceWage ViolationsRecord Keeping ViolationsEmployee RightsCorporate LiabilityLabor Law
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 7,408 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