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

Metropolitan Movers Ass'n v. Liu

Petitioners challenged the Comptroller's 2010 prevailing wage schedule for movers, arguing it was irrational and inconsistent with survey results, particularly regarding the application of Labor Law sections 220 and 230. The court found that the Comptroller incorrectly applied the 30% rule from Article 8 (Labor Law section 220), which is meant for 'Public Work' employees, instead of the discretion-based standard under Article 9 (Labor Law section 230) for 'Building Service Employees' like movers. The court also deemed arbitrary and capricious the Comptroller's inconsistent use of 'industry C' employees – including them to meet the 30% threshold but excluding their lower wages from the calculation. Consequently, the court annulled the Comptroller's prevailing wage schedule and remanded the case for a proper determination of the actual prevailing wage under Labor Law section 230, while denying other specific requests from the petitioners.

Prevailing WageLabor LawCPLR Article 78Comptroller DeterminationBuilding Service EmployeesMovers IndustryCollective Bargaining Agreement30% RuleArbitrary and CapriciousAdministrative Law
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hunley v. Silver Furniture Mfg. Co.

William D. Hunley, an employee of Silver Furniture Manufacturing Co. (SFMC), suffered work-related injuries and, along with his wife, Mrs. Hunley, settled claims against a third-party tortfeasor, Velvac, Inc. Mr. Hunley received $200,000 for personal injuries, and Mrs. Hunley received $200,000 for loss of consortium. The Hunleys filed a complaint seeking a declaratory judgment that Mrs. Hunley's settlement was not subject to SFMC's workers' compensation subrogation lien. The lower courts ruled in favor of SFMC, subjecting the spouse's recovery to the lien. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that an employer's subrogation right does not extend to a worker's spouse's recovery for loss of consortium. However, the Court also established that trial courts must review such settlements for fairness and reasonableness of allocation, with unreasonable portions subject to the employer's lien. The case was remanded to the trial court to apply this standard to the Hunleys' settlement.

Workers' Compensation SubrogationLoss of ConsortiumThird-Party TortfeasorSettlement ReviewDeclaratory JudgmentStatutory LienFairness and Reasonableness StandardApportionment of DamagesDerivative ClaimsTennessee Law
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Freeman's Furniture Co. v. Large

Walter C. Large was hired by Freeman’s Furniture Company to paint a building at $3.50 an hour, using his own brushes and ladder. He injured his back after five weeks. The Chancellor initially found him an employee and awarded benefits. However, the appellate court reversed this, ruling Large was a casual employee under T.C.A. § 50-906(b) because painting was not part of the employer's normal business operations. The court found no material evidence to support the trial judge's finding of an employer-employee relationship, emphasizing that the facts did not meet the exceptions for converting casual employment status.

Workers' CompensationCasual EmploymentEmployer-Employee RelationshipScope of Business OperationsAppellate ReviewMaterial EvidenceStatutory InterpretationPainting ContractorLabor LawTennessee Law
References
3
Case No. 04-16-00739-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 2018

Kara Lerma v. Pipe Movers, Inc.

Kara Lerma appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Pipe Movers, Inc. (PMI). The case originated from an automobile accident where PMI's employee, Rayleen Simpson, was cited for failing to yield the right of way, colliding with Lerma's vehicle. Lerma sued PMI, alleging vicarious liability for Simpson's negligence, gross negligence, and various direct negligence claims including negligent hiring, supervision, and retention. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issues of material fact regarding Simpson's course and scope of employment or PMI's alleged negligence. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

AppealSummary JudgmentVicarious LiabilityNegligenceCourse and Scope of EmploymentSpecial Mission ExceptionNegligent HiringNegligent SupervisionNegligent RetentionNegligent Training
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Crew v. First Source Furniture Group

Lacay Crew filed a workers' compensation claim against First Source Furniture Group, d/b/a Anderson Hickey Company, alleging injuries to her hands, wrists, and arms. The trial court initially found a compensable gradual injury and awarded permanent partial disability benefits. However, the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel reversed, citing insufficient evidence of causation from her employment with Anderson Hickey. The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the Appeals Panel's decision, concluding that Crew failed to establish a causal connection between her carpal tunnel syndrome and her employment with Anderson Hickey. The Court also applied the 'last injurious injury' rule, finding that her subsequent employment at Paslode likely aggravated her condition, thereby precluding Anderson Hickey's liability and reversing the award of discretionary costs.

Workers' CompensationCarpal Tunnel SyndromeRepetitive Stress InjuryCausationLast Injurious Injury RuleMedical EvidenceEMGDe Quervain’s TendonitisLupus DiagnosisPermanent Partial Disability
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Metro Furniture Rental, Inc. v. Alessi

This action was initiated by Metro Furniture Rental, Inc., alleging violations of RICO against Michael Alessi, Chemical Bank, and Buchbinder Stein Tunick & Platkin, along with pendent state claims for breach of contract, accountant malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and conversion. The case, originally filed in state court, was removed to the federal district court. Defendant Alessi's motion to remand to state court was denied as untimely. Defendants Chemical Bank and Buchbinder's motions to dismiss were granted in part, specifically dismissing the plaintiff's RICO claim due to insufficient particularity in pleading fraud and lack of evidence for a knowing agreement among defendants, and rejecting respondeat superior for Chemical Bank. The remaining pendent state claims were remanded sua sponte to the New York State Supreme Court.

RICO ActRacketeeringFraudMail FraudWire FraudAccountant MalpracticeBreach of ContractBreach of Fiduciary DutyConversionMotion to Remand
References
20
Case No. 2022-02-0435
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 05, 2024

Dingus, Gary v. GRAND PIANO AND FURNITURE COMPANY

Gary Dingus, an employee of Grand Piano and Furniture Company, suffered significant injuries after falling approximately 20 feet from a forklift. Grand Piano denied the claim, asserting Dingus willfully failed to use a safety device by not properly tethering himself. The Court, however, found that Dingus's injuries arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of his employment, rejecting Grand Piano's defense. The Court credited Mr. Dingus's testimony that he believed he was tethered and that the device may have loosened. As a result, the Court ordered Grand Piano to provide medical benefits, pay for past medical expenses, and provide temporary total and permanent partial disability benefits to Mr. Dingus.

Workers' CompensationForklift AccidentSafety DeviceWillful MisconductFall from HeightBack InjuryLeg FractureMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityPermanent Partial Disability
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Local 323 v. International Union of Electronic, Electrical, Salaried, MacHine & Furniture Workers

Plaintiffs, Local 323 and its officers, initiated a lawsuit against the International Union of Electronic, Electrical, Salaried, Machine and Furniture Workers (IUE). They alleged that the IUE unlawfully denied Local 323's right to disaffiliate, claiming the IUE amended its constitution to obstruct disaffiliation and breached its own rules in denying their application. Plaintiffs sought judicial enforcement of disaffiliation, retention of assets, an injunction, and damages. The defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting various defenses, including the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust internal union remedies. The court ultimately granted the defendant's motion, concluding that Local 323 had not exhausted its available administrative remedies within the union, a prerequisite for pursuing the claims in federal court, given the internal nature of the dispute.

Union DisaffiliationLabor LawLMRALMRDAExhaustion of Administrative RemediesInternal Union DisputeMotion to DismissBreach of ContractFederal Court JurisdictionUnion Constitution
References
14
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 02591 [204 AD3d 1258]
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 21, 2022

Matter of Abad v. Vanety's Serv., LLC

Juan Abad, a claimant, was injured while working as a warehouse attendant for ACME Furniture, having been placed there by Vanety's Service, LLC, a staffing agency. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found Vanety's Service, LLC, 100% liable for workers' compensation benefits. Upon appeal by Vanety, the Workers' Compensation Board modified the decision, establishing a general/special employment relationship between Vanety's Service, LLC (general employer) and ACME Furniture (special employer), and apportioned liability equally (50/50) between them. ACME Furniture and its carrier appealed this apportionment. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding no basis to disturb the apportionment and rejecting the carrier's due process claims.

Workers' CompensationGeneral/Special EmploymentLiability ApportionmentStaffing AgencyAppellate ReviewDue ProcessEmployer LiabilityInjuryLadder FallNew York Law
References
6
Case No. ADJ1083447 (LAO 0872246)
Regular
Mar 04, 2010

FRANKLIN GONZALEZ vs. ARGENT CUSTOM FURNITURE, DCS, UNINSURED EMPLOYER' FUND, CUSTOM CUSTOM FURNITURE LLC, CHARTIS/ STATE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Franklin Gonzalez, and defendants including Argent Custom Furniture and the Uninsured Employer's Fund. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued an order denying reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report in denying the petition.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDARGENT CUSTOM FURNITUREUNINSURED EMPLOYER' FUNDCUSTOM CUSTOM FURNITURE LLCCHARTIS/ STATE INSURANCE COMPANYADJ1083447LAO 0872246DENYING RECONSIDERATIONworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJ
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 140 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