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. 14-99-01125-CR to 14-99-01128-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 05, 2001

Gregory v. State

Appellant Glenn Gordon Gregory was convicted of four counts of indecency with a child involving his granddaughter, step-granddaughter, and a neighbor. The allegations included inappropriate sexual contact and exposure, which Gregory largely denied, admitting only unintentional exposure. The jury found him guilty, and sentences were assessed concurrently. Gregory appealed, raising nine points of error, including challenges to the admissibility of evidence and the sufficiency of intent. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, finding the evidence legally and factually sufficient for the intent element and overruling other points of error related to a polygraph reference, a videotaped interview, extraneous offenses, an outcry statement, and expert testimony.

Indecency with a childSexual contactExposureChild abuseExpert testimonyNurse expertHearsayPolygraphVideotaped interviewExtraneous offenses
References
69
Case No. Appeal Nos. 5104, 5105, 5106, 5107, 5108, 5109, 5110, 5111
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 12, 2001

Berkowitz v. A.C. & S., Inc.

This case involves an appeal by defendants-appellants from orders of the Supreme Court, New York County, which denied their motions for summary judgment in a series of lawsuits concerning asbestos exposure from Worthington pumps. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the lower court's decisions, finding sufficient issues of fact to preclude dismissal. Evidence presented included defendant Worthington's own admission of the high prevalence of its pumps on Navy ships, testimony from workers regarding Worthington pumps in the Brooklyn Navy Yard, and Worthington's use of asbestos-containing components like gaskets and packing. The court also noted a Worthington manual referencing asbestos and government specifications requiring asbestos use, questioning whether the pumps could be safely operated without asbestos insulation despite Worthington not manufacturing or installing it.

Asbestos ExposureProduct LiabilitySummary JudgmentDuty to WarnManufacturer LiabilityAppellate ReviewOccupational ExposureNavy ShipsGasketsPumps
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 14, 2013

Claim of DePascale v. Magazine Distributors, Inc.

The claimant applied for workers’ compensation benefits, alleging that extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma developed due to exposure to toxic substances at the employer's former nuclear fuel rod facility. The Workers’ Compensation Board initially reversed a WCLJ decision, finding insufficient evidence of a causal link. Later, the Board granted the claimant's request to consider new medical evidence, rescinded the WCLJ’s decision, and remitted the matter for a new determination. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier appealed these Board decisions and the subsequent denial of their request for reconsideration. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeals, deeming the Board’s decisions interlocutory and not final, thus not subject to piecemeal review.

Workers' CompensationCancerToxic ExposureCausal RelationshipMedical EvidenceInterlocutory AppealAppeal DismissalRemittalBoard ReviewNew York Appellate Division
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Valenti v. Penn Plax Plastics

The claimant, exposed to asbestos between 1965 and 1972, developed asbestosis, asbestos-related pleural disease, and lung cancer. His 1995 workers' compensation claim was denied by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board, which found his lung cancer causally related to asbestos exposure occurring before July 1, 1974, thus falling under the 'dust disease' rule requiring total disability for compensation. The claimant appealed, arguing lung cancer is not a dust disease. The appellate court reversed and remitted the decision, clarifying that while lung cancer itself is not a dust disease, the pre-1974 restriction applies if it's causally related to a dust disease like asbestosis. The court noted the Board failed to make a specific finding on this causal link.

asbestos exposurelung cancerasbestosisworkers' compensationdust diseasetotal disabilitypartial disabilitycausationremittalappellate review
References
9
Case No. M2009-00915-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 09, 2010

John Doe v. Robert E. Cooper, Jr., as Attorney General for State of Tennessee

This case addresses John Doe's constitutional challenge against the retroactive application of the Tennessee Sexual Offender Registration, Verification, and Tracking Act of 2004. Doe, convicted of indecent exposure in 2001, was subsequently classified as a sexual offender under the 2004 Act, leading to mandatory registration and employment restrictions. The trial court upheld the Act's constitutionality, viewing it as a non-punitive regulatory framework. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, ruling that both the registration requirements and the employment restraints, as applied to Doe, were not punitive and therefore did not violate the ex post facto clause of the Tennessee Constitution. The court emphasized the Act's purpose in promoting public safety.

Declaratory JudgmentRetroactive ApplicationSexual Offender RegistrationEx Post Facto LawConstitutional LawEmployment RestrictionsPublic SafetyIndecent ExposureNon-Punitive Regulatory SchemeTennessee Constitution
References
49
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wyatt v. Kroger Co.

Appellant Vickey Wyatt, individually and as next friend of her daughter Amber Barger, sued The Kroger Company after they witnessed an act of indecent exposure at a Kroger grocery store. Wyatt pursued claims of negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, both of which were dismissed via summary judgment in favor of Kroger. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment on the negligence claim, ruling that Kroger was not liable for emotional distress without evidence of physical harm from third-party acts. It also upheld the summary judgment on the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, determining that Kroger's actions were not sufficiently extreme and outrageous to warrant recovery. Consequently, the trial court's judgment was affirmed.

Premises LiabilityNegligenceIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressSummary Judgment AppealThird-Party Criminal ActEmotional HarmPhysical Harm RequirementIndecent ExposureBusiness Owner DutyMental Anguish Damages
References
44
Case No. 03-04-00661-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 17, 2007

Kenneth Garrett v. Texas Department of Public Safety, Thomas A. Davis, Individually and in His Official Capacity, Travis County and Patricia Michele Padron, Individually and in Her Official Capacity

Kenneth Garrett, convicted of indecent exposure, was classified as a "high-risk" sex offender, triggering public notification requirements. Garrett sued the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), its director Thomas A. Davis, Travis County, and community supervision officer Patricia Michele Padron, alleging improper classification and false public disclosures about a "second conviction." The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment for the defendants regarding the "high-risk" classification, deeming it an impermissible collateral attack on his criminal conviction and privacy rights claims. However, it reversed and remanded the summary judgment concerning Garrett's common-law tort claims (defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress) against Davis in his individual capacity, finding Davis failed to establish statutory immunity against claims for misstating Garrett's conviction history.

Sex Offender RegistrationHigh-Risk ClassificationIndecent ExposureCivil RightsDefamationIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressSummary JudgmentCollateral AttackStatutory ImmunityQualified Immunity
References
44
Case No. LBO 0377371
Regular
Apr 28, 2008

EDUBIJES TORREZ vs. RED HILLS COUNTRY CLUB, CHUBB SERVICES CORPORATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Chubb Insurance's petition for reconsideration, affirming the original finding that Edubijes Torrez sustained a cumulative trauma injury (leiomyosarcoma) due to chemical exposure as a groundskeeper. The Board found that despite the provision of protective gear in 1998, the applicant's exposure continued through his last year of employment, making Chubb, the insurer during that period, liable for the $100\%$ permanent disability award. Chubb's argument that exposure ceased in 1998 was rejected due to evidence of ineffective protective gear and continued exposure.

LeiomyosarcomaCumulative traumaLabor Code section 5500.5Injurious exposureRespirator protective gearLatency periodIndustrial chemical exposurePermanent disabilityGroundskeeperRed Hill Country Club
References
3
Case No. ADJ11721215
Regular
Mar 20, 2023

GLEN HODGES vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

This case concerns a firefighter's claim for melanoma under Labor Code section 3212.1, which presumes cancer is industrially caused. While the applicant raised the presumption through evidence of carcinogen exposure, the Appeals Board overturned the initial finding of industrial injury due to melanoma. The Board found the presumption was rebutted by expert medical opinion concluding the applicant's melanoma was not reasonably linked to industrial sun exposure, citing significant childhood sun exposure, tanning bed use, family history, and minimal workplace sun exposure to the affected area. The Board therefore granted reconsideration and amended the decision to exclude melanoma as an industrial injury, though actinic keratosis was still found to be industrially caused.

Labor Code section 3212.1cancer presumptionrebutted presumptionqualified medical evaluatorindustrial injuryactinic keratosismelanomafirefightercarcinogenInternational Agency for Research on Cancer
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 30, 1998

Claim of Gardner v. Structure Tone of NY, Inc.

The claimant sought workers' compensation benefits, alleging asbestosis due to asbestos exposure during employment as an elevator operator at a construction site. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found the claimant partially disabled by asbestosis, an occupational disease, and awarded benefits. The employer appealed, primarily disputing the claimant's asbestos exposure. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision after finding sufficient evidence of exposure and asbestosis. On further appeal, the employer argued that asbestosis was not inherent to an elevator operator's job, but the appellate court declined to consider this issue as it was not raised in the administrative appeal to the Board. The court also noted the employer abandoned the exposure issue by not raising it on the current appeal, thus affirming the Board's decision.

AsbestosisOccupational DiseaseAsbestos ExposureWorkers' Compensation BenefitsElevator OperatorAppealAdministrative AppealJudicial ReviewPreservation of IssueWCLJ Decision
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 889 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