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. ADJ7271033
Regular
Jan 25, 2017

JENNIFER LAWSON vs. GLEN IVY DAY SPA, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is considering rescinding an order that dismissed lien claimant Proex Diagnostics' lien for failure to pay a \$100 activation fee. Proex argues they had until December 31, 2015, to pay the fee based on a federal court order and DWC guidance. The WCAB's notice indicates they intend to rescind the dismissal if the fee is paid within ten days of the notice. If rescinded, the lien claim will return to the trial level for further proceedings.

Proex DiagnosticsGlen Ivy Day SpaCompWest Insurance CompanyBerkshire Hathaway Homestate CompaniesLien Activation FeeLabor Code Section 4903.06Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJReconsiderationCompromise and Release
References
1
Case No. 13-13-00463-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 10, 2013

the Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. John Doe

John Doe sued the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, alleging sexual assault by Eustacio Munioz and seeking damages based on vicarious and direct liability theories. The Church moved for summary judgment, asserting the claims were time-barred. The trial court denied the motion without stating its reasons. The Church petitioned the Court of Appeals for a permissive interlocutory appeal, arguing controlling questions of law regarding the statute of limitations and tolling doctrines like duress and continuing tort. The appellate court denied the petition, finding that the absence of a substantive ruling by the trial court prevented the identification of a clear controlling question of law, thus failing to meet the requirements for a permissive appeal.

Permissive appealInterlocutory orderSummary judgmentStatute of limitationsTollingDuressContinuing tort doctrineControlling question of lawAppellate procedureTexas law
References
12
Case No. 13-06-471-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2008

Day Cruises Maritime, L.L.C. and Corpus Christi Day Cruise, L.L.C. v. Christus Spohn Health System D/B/A Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial

This case involves an appeal from summary judgments. Appellants (Day Cruises Maritime, L.L.C. and Corpus Christi Day Cruise, L.L.C., collectively "Texas Treasure") contested the trial court's decision in favor of appellee (Christus Spohn Health System d/b/a Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial, "Christus"). The dispute arose from medical expenses incurred by a seaman, Judy Ann Lanado, employed by Texas Treasure, who suffered severe brain damage after surgery at Christus. Texas Treasure sought to avoid liability for the entire hospital bill and claimed equitable subrogation. The appellate court affirmed the denial of Texas Treasure's motion for summary judgment on its plea in intervention but reversed the granting of Christus's motions for summary judgment on its counterclaim and Texas Treasure's plea in intervention, remanding for further proceedings to determine negligence and attributable expenses.

Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewSworn AccountVerified DenialDue ProcessEquitable SubrogationMaintenance and CureMaritime LawAlien CrewmanHospital Expenses
References
52
Case No. 2014-06-0072
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 12, 2015

Brees, Sarah v. Escape Day Spa & Salon

Sarah Brees, a massage therapist, claimed a cumulative trauma injury to her right wrist while employed by Escape Day Spa & Salon. The employer initially denied compensability. The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims found for the employee, awarding medical and temporary disability benefits based on her testimony and Dr. Abbey's opinion. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed this decision, finding that the authorized treating physician, Dr. Siegel, had provided a causation opinion (no injury, unknown etiology, multifactorial) which was entitled to a presumption of correctness. The Board concluded that Dr. Abbey's opinion did not sufficiently rebut Dr. Siegel's, thus the employee failed to establish causation, and the case was remanded.

Workers' CompensationCumulative TraumaRepetitive Motion InjuryRight Wrist InjuryCausationMedical OpinionPresumption of CorrectnessTreating PhysicianAppeals BoardReversed and Remanded
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2008

Day Cruises Maritime, L.L.C. v. Christus Spohn Health System

Appellants Day Cruises Maritime, L.L.C. and Corpus Christi Day Cruise, L.L.C. appealed summary judgments in favor of Christus Spohn Health System regarding medical expenses for Judy Ann Lanado, a seaman who suffered severe brain damage. Christus sought payment based on a sworn account, a guarantee, and maritime maintenance and cure. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment for Christus's counterclaim, finding an ineffective sworn denial and Christus's lack of standing for the guarantee. It also found a material fact issue regarding the reasonableness of medical charges under maintenance and cure. The court affirmed the denial of equitable subrogation to appellants but remanded for a determination of Christus's potential negligence affecting the medical bill.

Maritime LawSummary JudgmentMaintenance and CureEquitable SubrogationSworn AccountDue ProcessAlien CrewmanMedical ExpensesTexas LawAppellate Procedure
References
52
Case No. 13-70667
Regular Panel Decision

De Sanchez Day Spa & Salon v. Gomez (In re Gomez)

Plaintiff De Sanchez Day Spa and Salon filed a complaint against former employee Hilda Gomez for violating a non-compete and non-solicitation agreement after Gomez began working at a competing salon within the restricted radius and soliciting former clients. A state court issued a temporary injunction, which Gomez violated. Following Gomez's Chapter 13 bankruptcy filing, the case was removed to federal bankruptcy court. Presiding Judge Marvin Isgur granted a preliminary injunction against Gomez until December 15, 2014, finding a substantial likelihood of De Sanchez succeeding on the merits, a threat of irreparable harm due to Gomez's bankruptcy, and that the injury to De Sanchez outweighed the harm to Gomez. The injunction is conditional on De Sanchez posting a $10,000 bond, with a final trial on the merits scheduled for December 15, 2014.

Non-compete agreementPreliminary injunctionBankruptcyBreach of contractNon-solicitationIrreparable harmEnforceability of covenantTexas Business and Commerce CodeEmployment contractTrade secrets
References
10
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00704 [213 AD3d 1050]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 2023

Matter of Paka (Same Day Delivery Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)

The case involves Jacques Paka, a delivery driver, who applied for unemployment insurance benefits after working for Same Day Delivery Inc. The Department of Labor initially determined Paka was an employee, making Same Day liable for contributions. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board initially overruled this, finding Paka to be an independent contractor. However, upon reconsideration requested by the Commissioner of Labor, the Board rescinded its prior decision and sustained the Department's original determination, finding an employment relationship. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, rejecting Same Day's arguments against the reopening of the case and finding substantial evidence to support the Board's conclusion that Same Day exercised sufficient control over Paka to establish an employment relationship. The Court also affirmed that these findings apply to similarly situated individuals.

Unemployment InsuranceIndependent ContractorEmployment RelationshipControl TestAppellate ReviewUnemployment Insurance Appeal BoardLabor LawUnemployment BenefitsDelivery DriverSubstantial Evidence
References
11
Case No. 2020-03-0939
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2021

Day, Misti v. Great Salons of Knoxville, Inc.

Misti G. Day sustained two work-related injuries in 2018 and 2019. Her initial petition for benefits was involuntarily dismissed without prejudice in December 2019 due to failure to prosecute. The employer subsequently ceased voluntary workers' compensation benefits in March 2020. Employee Day filed a second petition for benefits on April 30, 2020, seeking additional medical treatment for her injuries. The trial court determined that the employee's second petition was timely filed and that she was likely to prevail regarding her request for additional medical benefits. The employer appealed this decision, arguing the second petition was untimely. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court’s determinations and remanded the case.

Timeliness of PetitionInvoluntary DismissalStatute of LimitationsMedical Benefits DisputeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardInterlocutory AppealRemandRule 41.02Show Cause HearingWorkers' Compensation Benefits
References
3
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00867
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 06, 2019

Matter of Berg v. Planning Bd. of the City of Glen Cove

This appeal arises from a hybrid proceeding and action challenging determinations by the Planning Board of the City of Glen Cove regarding a major waterfront redevelopment project. Petitioners, residents of Glen Cove and surrounding areas, sought to review the Planning Board's 2011 adoption of a final environmental impact statement and a special use permit, as well as its 2015 resolution finding no need for a supplemental EIS for an amended plan. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, dismissed the challenge to the 2011 determination as time-barred and the challenge to the 2015 determination on the merits. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the statute of limitations barred the review of the 2011 determination and that the Planning Board had taken a 'hard look' at environmental concerns for the 2015 determination, thus upholding the dismissal.

Environmental ReviewSEQRAPlanning BoardZoningLand UseDeclaratory JudgmentInjunctive ReliefStatute of LimitationsEstoppelHybrid Proceeding
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2004

Trinity Universal Insurance Company v. Rebecca L. Day and Texas Workers' Compensation Commission

Trinity Universal Insurance Company appeals a judgment in favor of Rebecca L. Day and the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission (TWCC). The central issue is the timeliness of Trinity's Request for Review with the TWCC Appeals Panel, which impacts the trial court's jurisdiction. Rebecca Day sustained an injury in 1997 and subsequently applied for supplemental income benefits. A contested hearing in 2002 resulted in a decision that was mailed and placed in Trinity's Austin representative's box on July 24, 2002. Trinity filed its appeal with the TWCC Appeals Panel on August 15, 2002, which was deemed untimely by both the Appeals Panel and the trial court, leading to a finding of no jurisdiction. Trinity argued that under 28 TEX.ADMIN.CODE § 102.5(d), the deemed date of receipt was July 25, 2002, making their appeal timely. The appellate court concurred with Trinity's interpretation of the administrative code, thereby reversing the trial court's decision and remanding the case for further proceedings.

JurisdictionTimeliness of AppealWorkers' CompensationAdministrative CodePlea to JurisdictionDeemed Receipt DateAppellate ReviewStatutory ConstructionRemandInsurance Carrier
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 2,547 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