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. 900983-2015
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 16, 2016

Building Exterior Servs. Trust of N.Y. v. A.W. Farrell & Son, Inc.

Plaintiff Building Exterior Services Trust of New York (BEST), a group self-insurance trust, initiated an action against former members, including A.W. Farrell & Son, Inc., for unpaid monetary assessments levied in 2013 and 2014 to address a shortfall. Defendant A.W. Farrell & Son, Inc. moved to dismiss the complaint and a cross-claim, arguing that it ceased membership in 1994, was not bound by the 2000 Trust Documents, and that assessments could only be levied against current members, with any authority expiring in 2003. The Supreme Court, Albany County, denied the motion to dismiss, finding that the Trust Documents, specifically Section 4.8 of the Indemnity Agreement and Section 10.4 of the Declaration of Trust, could authorize assessments against former members for periods of participation. The court also rejected the statute-of-limitations defense, concluding that the breach-of-contract claim accrued when the defendant refused to pay the assessments.

Workers' Compensation LawGroup Self-Insurance TrustUnpaid AssessmentsMotion to DismissStatute of LimitationsBreach of ContractDeclaration of TrustIndemnity AgreementFormer MembersTrust Solvency
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thompson v. Apollo Paint & Body Shop

This case involves an appeal concerning the interpretation of "possession" as it relates to mechanic's liens under Chapter 70, Subchapter A, of the Texas Property Code. Apollo Paint & Body Shop repaired Leonard Boedecker's Corvette but was not paid after Boedecker stopped payment on a check. Apollo subsequently conducted a foreclosure sale and obtained a new certificate of title without actually possessing the vehicle. Jay Thompson later purchased the Corvette from Boedecker, who was in actual possession of the vehicle at the time of sale. The trial court initially awarded Apollo title and possession, but the appellate court reversed, ruling that actual possession is a prerequisite for foreclosing a statutory worker's lien and that Thompson qualified as a bona fide purchaser. The court concluded that Apollo's lien rights were cut off by Thompson's bona fide purchase, emphasizing the necessity of actual possession for perfecting such a lien.

Mechanic's LienPossessory LienTexas Property CodeBona Fide PurchaserForeclosure SaleActual PossessionConstructive PossessionCertificate of Title ActWorkers' LienAutomobile
References
11
Case No. 08-11-00264-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 08, 2014

Maria G. Thompson/Luis Marioni, D.C. v. Jaime Stolar, M.D., Alivio Medical Center, Alivio Treatment Centers, P.A. and Luis Marioni, D.C./Maria G. Thompson

This multi-party appeal originated from a medical and chiropractic malpractice lawsuit filed by Maria G. Thompson against Dr. Jaime Stolar, Dr. Luis Marioni, and Alivio Medical Center and Alivio Treatment Centers, P.A. Thompson alleged negligence resulting in severe knee injuries, including infection and fusions, following injections and treatment. A jury found Dr. Stolar and Dr. Marioni negligent, awarding damages. On appeal, the court reversed the judgment against Dr. Marioni due to insufficient evidence of causation but affirmed the judgment against Dr. Stolar. The court also upheld the denial of Thompson's claims regarding damages and apparent agency against Alivio.

Medical MalpracticeChiropractic MalpracticeKnee InjuryKnee InfectionSpontaneous FusionSurgical FusionNegligenceCausationDamages AssessmentApparent Agency
References
48
Case No. E1998-00535-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 29, 1999

Jerry Duncan Ford, Inc. v. J. Roy Frost, d/b/a Frost Construction Company

This case consolidates three breach of contract actions stemming from major renovations to an automobile dealership. Jerry Duncan Ford, Inc. sued its general contractor, J. Roy Frost d/b/a Frost Construction Company, for unsatisfactory performance, while Frost counter-sued for breach of contract. A third party, Customer Service Electric Supply, Inc., sued Jerry Duncan Ford, Frost, and the Duncans for unpaid light fixtures. The trial court found an oral guaranteed maximum price of $313,200 by Frost and awarded damages to Jerry Duncan Ford for costs exceeding this guarantee and for defective workmanship. Customer Service also received damages against Frost but its claim against Jerry Duncan Ford and the Duncans was dismissed for lack of proof. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment in all respects, concluding that parol evidence was properly admitted, that the evidence supported the finding of a guaranteed price, and that Frost had sufficient notice and opportunity to cure defects.

Breach of contractConstruction disputesGuaranteed maximum priceParol evidence ruleWitness credibilityQuantum meruitSubcontractor claimsConstruction defectsContract terminationAppellate review
References
13
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 00246 [157 AD3d 528]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 16, 2018

Casalini v. Alexander Wolf & Son

Plaintiff Michael Casalini was allegedly injured at work on a renovation site when he slipped and fell on a pile of debris. The Supreme Court initially granted defendants' in limine motion and dismissed the complaint, citing a prior order that found no negligence by defendant Alexander Wolf & Son regarding the debris. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed this decision, ruling that the motion in limine was effectively an untimely motion for summary judgment under CPLR 3212(a) and also premature under CPLR 4401 as plaintiffs were denied an evidentiary hearing. Consequently, the appellate court denied the motion, and the complaint was reinstated in its entirety.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentSlip and FallPremises LiabilityLabor LawSummary JudgmentMotion in LimineAppellate ProcedureIndemnificationThird-Party Claim
References
4
Case No. ADJ289247 (SJO 0262446) ADJ6981239
Regular
Jul 07, 2011

GARY SWIERSKI vs. LONG PAINTING COMPANY; ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, Adjusted By GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES; JERRY THOMPSON & SONS PAINTING, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, Adjusted By GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded the previous award because the administrative law judge's decision was not supported by substantial evidence regarding the date of injury and apportionment of liability. The Board found that the record needed further development, particularly by obtaining supplemental reports or depositions from the Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify these critical issues and potentially re-evaluate the applicant's election against co-defendants.

Cumulative TraumaApportionmentDate of InjuryJoint and Several AwardQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Temporary Disability IndemnityPermanent DisabilityReconsiderationFindings and AwardSubstantial Evidence
References
9
Case No. Williamson Chancery No. 23619, Appeal No. 01A01-9801-CH-00045
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 29, 1999

Thompson v. Telco

This case involves an alleged breach of an employment contract between Kerry Thompson (employee) and Telco, Inc. (employer). Thompson claimed a letter created a five-year employment contract, while Telco argued it was an at-will employment agreement. The trial court sided with Thompson, awarding him damages. On appeal, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee reversed, finding that the letter did not constitute a definite term employment contract and Thompson was an at-will employee. The court also reversed the trial court's order requiring Thompson to pay unemployment benefits back to the state, as there was no finding of fraudulent receipt of benefits.

employment contractat-will employmentbreach of contractunemployment benefitsmisrepresentationfraudappellate reviewcontract interpretationemployment lawTennessee law
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 16, 1970

Scalia v. Auserehl & Son Contracting Corp.

Frank Sealia, an iron worker, sued Auserehl & Son Contracting Corp., the general contractor, and Simon Holland & Son, Inc., a subcontractor, for personal injuries sustained from a fall at a construction site. Sealia claimed he fell from an "AUS"-marked ladder when its top rung broke. However, photographic evidence taken shortly after the accident by Auserehl's employee showed a different ladder, not owned by Auserehl, at the accident scene. Furthermore, two eyewitnesses and the investigating police officer testified that Sealia fell when a guy wire or steel cable snapped. The court concluded that the jury's verdict of $115,000 in favor of Sealia was against the weight of the credible evidence. Consequently, the judgment was reversed, and a new trial was granted.

Personal InjuryNegligenceConstruction AccidentLadder FallEvidentiary WeightJury VerdictNew TrialGeneral ContractorSubcontractorThird-Party Action
References
0
Case No. 12-06-00257-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 24, 2007

in Re: Thompson, Coe, Cousins, & Irons, LLP

Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, L.L.P. (Thompson Coe) filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. The respondent is Judge Randall L. Rogers, and the real party in interest is Deep East Texas Self-Insurance Fund (Deep East). Deep East had previously sued Cunningham Lindsey Claims Management, Inc., which Thompson Coe defended. A dispute arose regarding excessive attorney's fees charged by Thompson Coe, allegedly eroding Deep East's recovery from a 'high-low' agreement, leading Deep East to sue Thompson Coe. Thompson Coe's plea to the jurisdiction was denied by the trial court. The appellate court, the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, considered whether mandamus relief was appropriate. It concluded that while Thompson Coe would face further expense and delay, the circumstances did not constitute the extraordinary hardship required to bypass the adequate remedy by appeal. Therefore, the court denied the petition for writ of mandamus.

MandamusPlea to JurisdictionAppellate RemedyAbuse of DiscretionStandingAttorney FeesHigh-Low AgreementTexas Court of AppealsInsurance LitigationWorkers Compensation
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

WW Rodgers and Sons Produce Co. v. Johnson

Relators, W.W. Rodgers and Sons Produce Company and W.W. Rodgers and Sons Trucks, Inc., sought a writ of mandamus against respondent Judge H. Dee Johnson to compel discovery. The discovery concerned witness statements and an addendum/memorandum related to an accident involving a relator's truck and a Dallas police vehicle. The trial court had previously denied the discovery, citing Tex.R.Civ.P. 186a. The appellate court affirmed the denial, concluding that the documents were not discoverable solely for impeachment purposes, as established in Russell v. Young. The court emphasized that the trial court lacked the authority to order such discovery, deeming the trial court's refusal to permit discovery proper.

MandamusDiscoveryImpeachment EvidenceTrial ProcedureAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionTexas LawCivil ProcedureWitness StatementsPolice Reports
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 1,269 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