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. 04-22-00232-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 2024

Champion Food Service, Inc. and Champion Food Service 2, Inc. (Cross-Appellee) v. ProAlamo Foods, L.L.C. and ProCoastal, L.L.C. (Cross-Appellant)

Champion Food Service, Inc. and Champion Food Service 2, Inc. (Champion) appealed a final judgment in favor of ProAlamo Foods, L.L.C. and ProCoastal, L.L.C. (Pro Parties) after a jury trial. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order awarding additional post-verdict attorneys' fees to the Pro Parties, finding the re-opening of evidence impermissible. However, the court affirmed the judgment for the Pro Parties on their quantum meruit claim, including attorneys' fees (excluding the reversed post-verdict award). Champion's claims for DTPA violations and breach of implied warranty were denied due to insufficient evidence. The court upheld the trial court's evidentiary rulings regarding frozen meat products and text messages.

Quantum MeruitAttorneys' FeesDirected VerdictBreach of ContractImplied WarrantyDTPAAppellate ReviewJury VerdictPost-Verdict FeesFood Distribution
References
48
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Labatt Food Service, L.P.

Carlos Dancy, Jr., an employee of Labatt Food Service, L.P., died from an apparent asthma attack while working. Dancy had signed an agreement to participate in Labatt's occupational injury plan, which included an arbitration clause binding the employee "individually and on behalf of heirs and beneficiaries." After Dancy's death, his parents and children filed a wrongful death action against Labatt. Labatt moved to compel arbitration, which the trial court denied. This Court considers whether the arbitration provision binds Dancy's wrongful death beneficiaries, even though they were not signatories. The Court holds that it does, as wrongful death claims under Texas law are entirely derivative of the decedent's rights and are subject to the same defenses. The Court conditionally grants Labatt's petition for writ of mandamus, directing the trial court to compel arbitration.

Wrongful DeathArbitration AgreementNonsignatoriesDerivative ClaimsTexas LawFederal Arbitration ActMandamus ReliefEmployer LiabilityOccupational Injury PlanIndemnity Clause
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2005

Morales v. D & A Food Service

In this case, an order from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, affirmed the dismissal of a Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against defendant Gamillo M. Santomero, III, a landlord. The plaintiff was injured while performing repairs for defendant D & A Food Service, the tenant, without the landlord's knowledge or consent, in violation of the lease. The court ruled that the landlord, an out-of-possession owner, could not be held liable under Labor Law § 240 (1) due to the absence of a nexus between the owner and the worker. Precedent, including Abbatiello v Lancaster Studio Assoc., was cited to support the finding that an owner must have knowledge or consent of the work to be held liable, as the statute aims to place responsibility on those best able to control the workplace.

Summary JudgmentLabor Law § 240(1)Out-of-Possession OwnerLandlord LiabilityLack of KnowledgeConsent to WorkLease ViolationLadder FallNexus RequirementAppellate Affirmation
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Reese v. Sysco Food Services-Albany

The claimant, injured in 2007 while working for a food service company, initially received temporary partial disability payments for back and left hamstring injuries. A consequential injury to his right fifth metacarpal was later added to the claim. The Workers’ Compensation Board found that the claimant voluntarily removed himself from the labor market in May 2010 by not returning to a light duty assignment despite medical clearance. After further injuries and employment termination in 2012, the claimant sought an award for reduced earnings, arguing his current job was less demanding. Both the WCLJ and the Board denied this request, ruling that his reduction in earnings was not causally related to his compensable disability, a decision which was affirmed on appeal due to substantial evidence.

Reduced earningsVoluntary removal from labor marketLight duty assignmentCausally related disabilityWorkers' compensation appealBack injuryLeft lower extremity injuryRight fifth metacarpal fractureLeft knee problemsMedical clearance
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Vandewalker v. Quandt's Food Service Distributors, Inc.

Plaintiff Helen M. Vandewalker initiated legal action against Quandt’s Food Service Distributors, Inc., alleging gender discrimination under Title VII, unlawful retaliation related to a Workers’ Compensation claim, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and a New York Human Rights Law violation. Vandewalker contended that her termination followed a workplace injury and was discriminatory. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment. The court denied both motions, concluding that genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment. Additionally, the court dismissed the voluntarily withdrawn state claims and upheld a magistrate judge's order allowing the plaintiff to amend her complaint to include the Human Rights Law claim, finding the amendment neither futile nor prejudicial.

Gender DiscriminationTitle VIIWorkers' Compensation RetaliationSummary JudgmentEmployment TerminationHuman Rights LawPretextPrima Facie CaseDiscriminatory IntentFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)
References
17
Case No. 13-13-00205-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 2014

Aon Risk Services Southwest, Inc. v. C.L. Thomas, Inc. and Speedy Stop Food Stores, LLC.

Aon Risk Services Southwest, Inc. (Aon) appeals a judgment in favor of Speedy Stop Food Store, LLC and C.L. Thomas, Inc. (Thomas). Aon was Thomas's insurance broker and was alleged to have breached a fee agreement by advising Thomas that copyright infringement coverage did not exist for the Interplan Suit and for failing to timely notify Lexington Insurance Company of the suit. Thomas incurred substantial attorney's fees defending the Interplan Suit, which was later dismissed. The trial court determined that the Lexington Policy would have provided coverage if timely notice had been given. Aon contended that Thomas could not bring a breach of contract claim, that the award of attorney's fees was improper, and that there was insufficient evidence for the attorney's fee award. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the legal determination of coverage, the breach of contract claim, or the award of attorney's fees.

Insurance Broker LiabilityBreach of ContractDuty to DefendAttorney FeesCopyright InfringementSummary JudgmentEight-Corners RuleInsurance Coverage DisputeTimely NoticeAppellate Review
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jose Gerardo Padilla, Giovanna Padilla and Houston Best Foods & Services, LLC D/B/A Doneraki Fulton v. Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County

Appellants Jose Gerardo Padilla, Giov-anna Padilla, and Houston Best Foods & Services, LLC d/b/a Doneraki Fulton appealed the trial court's dismissal of their inverse condemnation lawsuit against the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (Metro). They alleged that Metro's light rail construction along Fulton Street temporarily blocked access to their Doneraki restaurant, causing its closure and significant losses, entitling them to compensation under Article 1, Section 17 of the Texas Constitution. The trial court had dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, asserting that any damages were non-compensable community damages and that Metro lacked the necessary intent for a taking. The appellate court, however, found that the jurisdictional evidence raised genuine issues of material fact regarding both Metro’s intent and whether the construction caused a temporary, total denial of access to the restaurant. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's order of dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings.

inverse condemnationsubject-matter jurisdictionaccess impairmenttemporary total denialproperty rightsgovernmental intentTexas Constitutionlight rail projectconstruction damageslost profits
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Falkowski v. Krasdale Foods, Inc.

This case involves appeals and a cross-appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County. Commercial Personnel Services, Inc., Commercial Transportation Group, and Commercial Logistics, Inc. appealed parts of the order that granted summary judgment to Krasdale Foods, Inc. on claims of contractual indemnification and breach of contract for failure to procure insurance. Krasdale Foods, Inc. cross-appealed the granting of the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to add a negligent entrustment cause of action, and the denial of its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The appellate court affirmed the order regarding both the appeals and the cross-appeal. This decision upholds the lower court's rulings on contractual indemnification, breach of contract for failure to procure insurance, and the allowance of the amended complaint for negligent entrustment, while denying Krasdale's motion to dismiss the complaint due to unresolved issues of fact.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentContractual IndemnificationBreach of ContractFailure to Procure InsuranceNegligent EntrustmentAppellate ProcedureThird-Party ComplaintWorkers' Compensation LawAffirmed Order
References
20
Case No. 03-10-00709-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 2011

Green Tree Servicing, LLC, as Authorized Servicing Agent for Conseco Finance Servicing Corporation v. Travis County

Green Tree Servicing, LLC appealed a post-answer default judgment concerning ad valorem taxes on mobile homes. The original suit was filed by Travis County and other entities against Conseco Finance Servicing Corporation, later substituted with Green Tree. Green Tree failed to appear at trial, resulting in a default judgment. Green Tree filed a motion for new trial, asserting its failure to appear was due to an accident or mistake (attorney transition) and that it had a meritorious defense, arguing that as a repossessing lienholder and not an owner, it was not liable for the taxes under Texas Tax Code Ann. § 32.07. The appellate court applied the Craddock test and found that Green Tree satisfied all three elements. The court adopted the interpretation that a repossessing lienholder is not considered an 'owner' under the tax code. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial.

Post-answer default judgmentAd valorem taxesMobile homesLienholder liabilityProperty ownershipMeritorious defenseCraddock testNew trialStatutory interpretationTexas Tax Code
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Volt Technical Services Corp. v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Plaintiff Volt Technical Services Corp. applied for H-2 visas for nuclear start-up technicians, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) denied, asserting the need was permanent, not temporary. After the denial was affirmed on appeal, Volt filed suit, alleging the INS's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the INS's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act § 101(a)(15)(H)(ii), which requires the employer's need for services to be temporary, not just the individual assignments. Finding that Volt demonstrated a recurring need for such technicians over several years, the court granted the INS's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Volt's.

Immigration LawH-2 visasNonimmigrant WorkersTemporary EmploymentImmigration and Nationality ActAdministrative Procedures ActDeclaratory Judgment ActAgency InterpretationJudicial ReviewNuclear Industry
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 9,374 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