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
Oct 15, 1998

High View Fund, L.P. v. Hall

Plaintiffs, The High View Fund, L.P. and The High View Fund, filed an Amended Complaint asserting claims against E. William Hall and Karen W. Hall for violations of federal securities laws, fraudulent inducement, Delaware Blue Sky laws, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, conversion, and breach of contract. The claims stem from the plaintiffs' $1 million investment in United Golf Properties, Inc. and the defendants' alleged misuse of the company's assets and misrepresentations in an Offering Memorandum. Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint. The court, presided over by District Judge Scheindlin, granted dismissal for the federal securities law claims and common law fraud claims, allowing leave to amend. Additionally, the conversion and breach of contract claims were dismissed with prejudice. However, the motion to dismiss was denied for the Delaware Blue Sky law claims, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment claims.

Securities FraudMotion to DismissRule 12(b)(6)Rule 9(b)Fiduciary DutyUnjust EnrichmentConversionBreach of ContractDelaware Blue Sky LawInvestment Fraud
References
50
Case No. M2010-01899-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 21, 2011

Willie J. High v. Sumner County, Tennessee

Willie J. High, an employee of Sumner County, was injured on the job and sought disability benefits. Initially, his disability was treated as permanent partial, leading to a lower settlement offer from Sumner County, which was upheld by the administrative review board. High appealed to the chancery court, which determined the review board should have considered total disability and remanded the case. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding the review board acted arbitrarily and capriciously by not considering Mr. High's permanent total disability, and remanded the matter back to the Review Board.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Total DisabilityAdministrative LawArbitrary and CapriciousWrit of CertiorariMedical ImpairmentSumner County PlanRemandAppellate ReviewDisability Benefits
References
9
Case No. 3-92-151-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 1993

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Texas High-Speed Rail Authority and Texas TGV Consortium

Appellant Southwest Airlines Co. appealed the dismissal of its suit for judicial review against the Texas High-Speed Rail Authority and Texas TGV Consortium. The district court dismissed the case, citing a lack of jurisdiction and Southwest's lack of standing to challenge the Authority's decision to award a high-speed rail franchise to Texas TGV. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, holding that Section 19 of the Administrative Procedure and Texas Register Act (APTRA) is a procedural provision and does not independently create a right to judicial review. Furthermore, Southwest failed to demonstrate a vested property right that would entitle it to judicial review apart from statutory authority, as its CAB certificate was insufficient and its claim against "illegal competition" was not based on a permit or regulation from the Authority. The court also found no harm in the trial court's failure to file findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Judicial ReviewJurisdictionStandingAdministrative LawHigh-Speed RailFranchiseProperty RightsDue ProcessTexasCourt of Appeals
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Texas High-Speed Rail Authority

Southwest Airlines Company appealed the dismissal of its suit for judicial review of an order issued by the Texas High-Speed Rail Authority. The Authority had granted a franchise to Texas TGV Consortium, which Southwest sought to challenge. The district court in Travis County dismissed Southwest's petition, citing a lack of jurisdiction and standing because no statute provided for judicial review of the Authority's decisions, and Southwest lacked an inherent right to such review. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, clarifying that the Administrative Procedure Act's provisions for judicial review are procedural and do not create jurisdiction or waive governmental immunity. Furthermore, Southwest failed to demonstrate a vested property right that would entitle it to judicial review apart from statutory authorization.

Judicial ReviewAdministrative LawGovernmental ImmunityJurisdictionStandingHigh-Speed RailFranchise LawAppellate ProcedureDue ProcessProperty Rights
References
30
Case No. 2014-1081 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 05, 2016

High Quality Med. Supplies, Inc. v. Mercury Ins. Group

This case involves an appeal concerning assigned first-party no-fault benefits sought by High Quality Medical Supplies, Inc., as assignee of Charles Botwee. The defendant, Mercury Ins. Group, appealed an order from the Civil Court that denied its motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint. Mercury Ins. Group contended that billing for durable medical equipment not listed in a fee schedule is not compensable. However, the Appellate Term affirmed the lower court's decision, citing 11 NYCRR 68.5, which specifically permits reimbursement for healthcare services not explicitly covered by fee schedules, thereby rejecting the defendant's argument.

No-Fault BenefitsFirst-Party BenefitsDurable Medical EquipmentFee ScheduleSummary JudgmentAppellate TermAssigned BenefitsInsurance LawReimbursementCivil Court
References
3
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 06638 [175 AD3d 1446]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 18, 2019

Roblero v. Bais Ruchel High Sch., Inc.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed two Supreme Court orders in a personal injury action. Plaintiff Cristian Roblero, injured after falling from a scaffold while performing plumbing work for Bais Ruchel High School, Inc., was not provided with necessary safety devices. The Supreme Court granted Roblero summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1) and denied Bais Ruchel's motions to dismiss Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, and for summary judgment on its third-party contractual indemnification claim against ADD Plumbing, Inc. The Appellate Division concluded that Roblero established a prima facie case for Labor Law § 240 (1) and Bais Ruchel failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Additionally, Bais Ruchel failed to establish it lacked supervisory authority for the Labor Law § 200/common-law negligence claims or its entitlement to indemnification.

Personal InjuryLabor Law § 240(1)Scaffold AccidentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewPremises LiabilityNondelegable DutyContractual IndemnificationThird-Party ActionConstruction Site Safety
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York State Employment Relations Board v. Christ the King Regional High School

The New York State Employment Relations Board initiated a proceeding to enforce its order against Christ the King Regional High School, which mandated good-faith bargaining with the Lay Faculty Association and reinstatement of teachers. The School challenged this order on First Amendment grounds, specifically citing the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, arguing for an absolute exemption from the New York State Labor Relations Act. The Supreme Court and Appellate Division ruled in favor of the Board. The Court of Appeals affirmed these decisions, concluding that the Act, being a neutral and generally applicable regulatory measure, did not violate the First Amendment rights of the religious school in its labor relations with lay faculty. The court also upheld the reinstatement of teacher Gaglione, finding insufficient evidence of religious entanglement to preclude it.

First AmendmentFree Exercise ClauseEstablishment ClauseLabor LawCollective BargainingReligious SchoolsLay Faculty RightsEmployment DisputesJudicial ReviewAdministrative Order Enforcement
References
19
Case No. 07-10-0397-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2011

Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Dallas Area Parkinsonism Society, Inc. and American Cancer Society High Plains Division, Inc.

Appellant Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. appealed a summary judgment granted to Appellees Dallas Area Parkinsonism Society, Inc. and American Cancer Society High Plains Division, Inc. Chesapeake sought to recover bonus money paid for oil and gas leases, arguing the trial court erred in finding its claims were barred by the nature of the leases as quitclaim deeds. The appellate court examined whether the leases, containing a special warranty, functioned as a quitclaim deed or purported to convey title to the property. It also reviewed arguments concerning justifiable reliance and causation in negligent misrepresentation claims. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings, finding the leases were not quitclaims and that issues of fact remained regarding negligent misrepresentation.

Summary JudgmentOil and Gas LeasesBonus MoneyRescissionRestitutionMutual MistakeUnilateral MistakeUnjust EnrichmentNegligent MisrepresentationCovenant of Seisin
References
38
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Darowski v. High Meadow Cooperative No. 1

Joseph Darowski initiated a personal injury lawsuit against High Meadow Cooperative No. 1 and Anker Management Corporation for injuries sustained during asbestos removal. High Meadow and Anker subsequently filed a third-party action against Darowski's employer, Asbestos Industries of America, Inc. (AIA), seeking defense and indemnification due to a contract breach regarding liability insurance. AIA appealed an order that denied its motion to compel further discovery and granted summary judgment to High Meadow and Anker, declaring AIA's duty to defend and indemnify. The appellate court modified the order, ruling that AIA's motion to depose High Meadow and Anker representatives should be granted, but otherwise affirmed the summary judgment against AIA due to its failure to procure adequate insurance. The decision also clarified that a recent 1996 amendment to the Workers' Compensation Law, limiting third-party actions against employers, would not apply retroactively to this pending case.

Asbestos ExposurePersonal Injury DamagesThird-Party IndemnificationDuty to DefendSummary Judgment AppealDiscovery DisputeDeposition OrderBreach of ContractLiability Insurance PolicyWorkers' Compensation Law
References
5
Case No. 07-10-0397-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2011

Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Dallas Area Parkinsonism Society, Inc. and American Cancer Society High Plains Division, Inc.

Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. (Chesapeake) appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Dallas Area Parkinsonism Society, Inc. (DAPS) and American Cancer Society High Plains Division, Inc. (ACS). Chesapeake sought to recover bonus money paid for oil and gas leases, asserting claims for breach of the covenant of seisin, rescission due to mutual mistake, unilateral mistake, money had and received/unjust enrichment, and negligent misrepresentation. The Charities argued the leases, despite containing a special warranty, operated as quitclaim deeds and that Chesapeake could not show justifiable reliance due to an independent title investigation. The appellate court concluded that the leases were special warranty deeds, conveying the property itself, not merely quitclaim deeds. Furthermore, the court found that Chesapeake's preliminary title investigation did not negate reliance or causation, as it reinforced the Charities' representations and failed to reveal the defects. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Oil and Gas LeaseSummary JudgmentSpecial Warranty DeedQuitclaim DeedMutual MistakeUnilateral MistakeUnjust EnrichmentNegligent MisrepresentationCovenant of SeisinContract Dispute
References
42
Showing 1-10 of 507 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