Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 2017-05-0869

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 16, 2019

Ailshie, Darrell v. TN Farm Bureau Federation

In this interlocutory appeal, employee Darrell Ailshie alleged head and neck injuries from a work accident, leading to a neurologist's opinion on permanent impairment. Employer TN Farm Bureau Federation sought to exclude parts of this testimony, arguing non-compliance with Tennessee Rules of Evidence 702 and 703. The trial court denied the motion, finding the doctor's opinions admissible. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the doctor's self-taught knowledge of the AMA Guides and inability to recall specific grade modifiers did not render her expert opinion inadmissible under the relevant statutes and rules.

Workers' CompensationMedical ImpairmentExpert WitnessAdmissibility of EvidenceNeurologyTraumatic Brain InjuryCervical InjuryAMA GuidesAbuse of DiscretionMotion in Limine

References

Case No. 2014-06-0062

Regular Panel Decision

Jun 19, 2015

King, Cynthia v. Letica Corporation

The Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed an employee's interlocutory appeal as untimely. Cynthia King alleged work-related cumulative trauma, but her employer, Letica Corporation, denied benefits based on the treating physician's opinion that the condition was not work-related. The trial court upheld this denial, citing the employee's failure to rebut the statutory presumption. The employee's subsequent appeal was filed sixteen days after the trial court's order, exceeding the seven-business-day statutory limit for interlocutory appeals. Consequently, the Appeals Board lacked jurisdiction and remanded the case for further proceedings.

timelinessinterlocutory appealworkers' compensationcumulative traumacarpal tunnel syndromemedical benefitstemporary disabilitycausationstatutory presumptionappeals board

References

Case No. 2015-01-0012

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 29, 2015

Buchanan, Luther v. Carlex Glass Co.

This interlocutory appeal concerns employee Luther Buchanan's claim of a right knee injury sustained while changing a paint screen at work for Carlex Glass Co. The employer denied the claim, asserting the accident did not occur. The trial court initially granted medical benefits, concluding the employee presented sufficient evidence to likely prevail. However, the Appeals Board reviewed the record, including surveillance video and conflicting employee testimony regarding the incident's time and occurrence. The Board ultimately reversed the trial court's decision and remanded the case, finding the employee's testimony insufficient against the employer's uncontradicted evidence and therefore failed to meet the burden of proof for an injury by accident.

Workers' CompensationInterlocutory AppealBurden of ProofMedical BenefitsInjury by AccidentVideo SurveillanceCredibility of TestimonyAppeals Board DecisionReversed and RemandedTennessee Law

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement Co.

The court granted a motion to dismiss an appeal, finding the board's decision to deny applications to reopen three cases and restore two active cases to the referee calendar to be interlocutory and thus not appealable under Workers’ Compensation Law, § 23. The court also noted that the board's decision did not preclude the parties from litigating the effect of previous injuries on the claimant’s overall disability in the active cases. Furthermore, the decision appealed from can be reviewed later on an appeal from a final decision of the board.

appeal dismissalinterlocutory decisionworkers' compensation lawreopening casesreferee calendarappealabilityfinal decision reviewclaimant disabilityprocedural lawjudicial panel decision

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Keene Corp. v. Williams Bailey & Wesner, L.L.P. (In Re Keene Corp.)

Keene Corporation, in Chapter 11 bankruptcy, filed an adversary proceeding against 27 law firms, alleging they forced Keene into bankruptcy through fraudulent asbestos-related tort claims. The defendant law firms moved to withdraw the reference of this proceeding from the bankruptcy court to the district court, citing complex federal statutes (Antitrust and RICO) and a jury trial right. Defendant Levy Phillips & Konigsberg also appealed an interlocutory order denying its motion to dismiss a civil contempt proceeding. The District Court, presided over by Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy, denied the defendants' motion to withdraw the reference, deeming it premature, and dismissed LPK's interlocutory appeal, affirming the bankruptcy court's ruling on contempt. The court determined the adversary proceeding was non-core and did not warrant mandatory or discretionary withdrawal at this early stage.

Bankruptcy LawAdversary ProceedingWithdrawal of ReferenceInterlocutory AppealCivil ContemptAntitrust LawRICO ActAsbestos LitigationFederal JurisdictionCore vs. Non-Core Proceedings

References

Case No. 2014-06-0053

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 02, 2015

Bates, Pamela v. Command Center, Inc.

Pamela Bates, an employee, alleged injuries from an assault by an intoxicated co-worker at Command Center, Inc. The employer denied benefits, asserting the assault was not work-related. The trial court, following an expedited hearing, denied Bates's request for medical and temporary disability benefits, concluding the assault was private and lacked a work connection. Bates appealed this interlocutory order. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the appeal as untimely, noting the notice of appeal was filed on March 16, 2015, beyond the statutory deadline of March 10, 2015, for the order issued on February 27, 2015. The Board emphasized that timely filing of an appeal notice is a mandatory and jurisdictional requirement in civil and workers' compensation cases. The case is remanded for any further necessary proceedings.

Assault at WorkUntimely AppealInterlocutory OrderJurisdictional DefectPro Se LitigantExpedited HearingDenial of Medical BenefitsDenial of Temporary Disability BenefitsStatutory DeadlineRemand

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Bass v. Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission

The Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission challenged the court's jurisdiction over an appeal filed by James Bass, Executive Director of the Texas Department of Transportation. The appeal concerned interlocutory orders from a district court, which included granting partial summary judgment to the Planning Commission and deferring a ruling on a plea to the jurisdiction by the Executive Director. The Executive Director argued for jurisdiction under Section 51.014(a)(8) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, asserting an implicit denial of his jurisdictional challenges. However, the appellate court concluded it lacked jurisdiction because the district court's explicit deferral of the jurisdictional ruling contradicted any implied denial, or alternatively, effectively vacated any such implied ruling. Consequently, the Planning Commission's motion was granted, and the appeal was dismissed.

interlocutory appealsubject-matter jurisdictiongovernmental immunityplea to the jurisdictionpartial summary judgmentTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeLocal Government Codemandamus reliefinjunctive reliefultra vires claims

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mills v. EVEREST REINSURANCE COMPANY

This memorandum addresses motions for certificates of appealability filed by Plaintiff Howard Mills and Defendant Benfield Inc. Plaintiff sought to appeal the grant of summary judgment in favor of Everest Reinsurance Company, while Benfield sought to appeal the denial of its motion for summary judgment. The Court reviews the criteria for granting interlocutory appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), which requires a controlling question of law, substantial ground for difference of opinion, and a material advancement of litigation termination. The Court denied Plaintiff's motion, finding that the appeal would not be a purely legal endeavor, that different standards apply to motions to dismiss versus summary judgment, and that the time savings alone is insufficient. The Court also denied Benfield's motion, emphasizing that interlocutory appeals of summary judgment denials are generally disfavored, as they often involve disputed factual issues best resolved at trial. The Court concluded that neither motion met the 'exceptional circumstances' required for an interlocutory appeal.

Certificate of AppealabilityInterlocutory AppealSummary JudgmentDenial of MotionFraudulent ConveyanceFederal Practice and ProcedureDiscretionary ReviewExceptional CircumstancesControlling Question of LawSubstantial Ground for Difference of Opinion

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 24, 2013

Service Employees International Union Local 5, Dan Schlademan and Susan Strubbe v. Professional Janitorial Service of Houston, Inc.

Service Employees International Union Local 5 (and two officers) appealed the denial of their summary judgment motion in a case alleging defamation, business disparagement, and tortious interference brought by Professional Janitorial Service of Houston, Inc. (PJS). PJS contended the union published defamatory statements as part of a 'Justice for Janitors' campaign after PJS declined union representation for its employees. The union sought summary judgment, arguing a lack of actual malice and that their statements were nonactionable opinions. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, concluding it lacked interlocutory jurisdiction because the union did not qualify as a 'member of the electronic or print media' or a 'person whose communication appeared in or was published by the electronic or print media' under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(6).

DefamationBusiness DisparagementTortious InterferenceInterlocutory AppealSummary JudgmentFree SpeechFree PressMedia DefendantLabor DisputeUnion Campaign

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Garti v. Salvation Army

The claimant alleged a work-related injury while moving a couch. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found prima facie medical evidence, allowing the case to proceed. The employer and its carrier appealed this interlocutory finding to the Workers’ Compensation Board, which refused review and imposed a penalty, citing 12 NYCRR 300.38 (g)(3)(i). The Board determined that findings of prima facie medical evidence are interlocutory and not reviewable at that stage. The employer then appealed to this Court, challenging the regulation and the penalty. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal, concurring that the WCLJ's finding of prima facie medical evidence is an interlocutory decision and not immediately appealable, affirming the Board's interpretation of the regulation and deeming the challenge to the penalty premature.

Workers' Compensation LawPrima Facie Medical EvidenceInterlocutory DecisionAppeal DismissalRegulatory ComplianceNew York Workers' Compensation BoardAppellate DivisionWorkers' Compensation Law JudgeCausal RelationshipPenalty for Delay

References

Showing 1-10 of 34,831 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 2017-05-0869

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 16, 2019

Ailshie, Darrell v. TN Farm Bureau Federation

Workers' CompensationMedical ImpairmentExpert WitnessAdmissibility of EvidenceNeurologyTraumatic Brain InjuryCervical InjuryAMA GuidesAbuse of DiscretionMotion in Limine

References

Case No. 2014-06-0062

Regular Panel Decision

Jun 19, 2015

King, Cynthia v. Letica Corporation

timelinessinterlocutory appealworkers' compensationcumulative traumacarpal tunnel syndromemedical benefitstemporary disabilitycausationstatutory presumptionappeals board

References

Case No. 2015-01-0012

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 29, 2015

Buchanan, Luther v. Carlex Glass Co.

Workers' CompensationInterlocutory AppealBurden of ProofMedical BenefitsInjury by AccidentVideo SurveillanceCredibility of TestimonyAppeals Board DecisionReversed and RemandedTennessee Law

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement Co.

appeal dismissalinterlocutory decisionworkers' compensation lawreopening casesreferee calendarappealabilityfinal decision reviewclaimant disabilityprocedural lawjudicial panel decision

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Keene Corp. v. Williams Bailey & Wesner, L.L.P. (In Re Keene Corp.)

Bankruptcy LawAdversary ProceedingWithdrawal of ReferenceInterlocutory AppealCivil ContemptAntitrust LawRICO ActAsbestos LitigationFederal JurisdictionCore vs. Non-Core Proceedings

References

Case No. 2014-06-0053

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 02, 2015

Bates, Pamela v. Command Center, Inc.

Assault at WorkUntimely AppealInterlocutory OrderJurisdictional DefectPro Se LitigantExpedited HearingDenial of Medical BenefitsDenial of Temporary Disability BenefitsStatutory DeadlineRemand

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Bass v. Waller County Sub-Regional Planning Commission

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mills v. EVEREST REINSURANCE COMPANY

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 24, 2013

Service Employees International Union Local 5, Dan Schlademan and Susan Strubbe v. Professional Janitorial Service of Houston, Inc.

DefamationBusiness DisparagementTortious InterferenceInterlocutory AppealSummary JudgmentFree SpeechFree PressMedia DefendantLabor DisputeUnion Campaign

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Garti v. Salvation Army

References

Showing 1-10 of 34,831 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.