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
Sep 03, 1982

Cerrato v. Thurcon Construction Corp.

This case concerns a construction worker (plaintiff) who sustained serious injuries and sued 211 Thompson Corp. (owner) and Thurcon Construction Corp. (general contractor). Defendant 211 Thompson Corp. raised an affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction due to improper service of process. After the Statute of Limitations had expired, plaintiff moved to strike this defense, while 211 cross-moved to dismiss the action as time-barred. Special Term referred the issue of service validity to a referee, but the plaintiff argued for a jury trial on this factual issue. The Appellate Division, Supreme Court, New York County, modified Special Term's order, directing a jury trial on the validity of the service, while otherwise affirming the original determination. The dissenting opinion argued that the right to a jury trial should not be conditioned on the stage of proceedings or the impact of dismissal on the Statute of Limitations, and furthermore, considered the question of authority to accept service as one of law, not fact.

Jury TrialService of ProcessPersonal JurisdictionStatute of LimitationsAffirmative DefenseAppellate ReviewCPLRProcedural LawConstruction AccidentsNew York Courts
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 22, 2009

Ramirez v. Willow Ridge Country Club, Inc.

This judgment affirms the dismissal of a complaint after a jury trial in New York County. The plaintiff, injured during demolition work at Willow Ridge Country Club, Inc., claimed he fell from a deck with a removed railing, while the foreman stated he fell from ladders while pulling a gutter. The jury found a Labor Law § 240 (1) violation but determined it was not the proximate cause, accepting the foreman's account. The appellate court upheld the verdict, addressing the plaintiff's challenges regarding jury instructions on attorney-client privilege and the preclusion of an unsigned deposition transcript under CPLR 3116. The court found no grounds to overturn the jury's decision or the trial court's rulings.

Demolition accidentJury verdictLabor Law violationProximate causeCPLR 3116Attorney-client privilegeAppellate affirmancePersonal injuryConstruction safetyWitness testimony
References
10
Case No. E2012-02112-COA-R9-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2014

Larry Sneed v. The City of Red Bank, Tennessee

This case addresses whether the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA) governs Tennessee Human Rights Act (THRA) claims against governmental entities and if there is a right to a jury trial for such claims in chancery court. The Court rejected the analysis from Young v. Davis, which had suggested the GTLA applied broadly to statutory claims against governmental entities, overruling it partially. Applying the Cruse v. City of Columbia analysis, the Court held that the THRA is an independent statute that removes governmental immunity and establishes legislative intent to provide a right to a jury trial for THRA claims against governmental entities in chancery court. Consequently, the Court of Appeals' judgment was reversed, and the trial court's transfer order was vacated, remanding the case to chancery court.

Sovereign ImmunityJury Trial RightAge DiscriminationRetaliatory DischargeStatutory InterpretationGovernmental ImmunityTHRAGTLAChancery CourtInterlocutory Appeal
References
68
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rowe v. Board of Education

Plaintiff sued Chatham Central School District Middle School for negligence after sustaining injuries from a fall in the school cafeteria, allegedly due to accumulated mud, water, and a lack of rain mats. The defendant School District subsequently impleaded the Chatham Central Teachers’ Association, claiming the Association was in control of the cafeteria and responsible for the plaintiff's injuries. Following a trial, the jury rendered a verdict of no cause for action in favor of both the School District and the Association. However, Special Term set aside this verdict and granted a new trial, based on evidence suggesting an accumulation of mud and water and the defendant's failure to provide janitorial services. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed Special Term's order, reinstating the original jury verdict, concluding that the jury's finding was not against the weight of the evidence given the conflicting testimony presented at trial.

NegligencePremises LiabilitySlip and FallJury VerdictWeight of EvidenceAppellate ReviewNew Trial Order ReversedSchool CafeteriaChatham Central School DistrictColumbia County
References
3
Case No. 2-03-014-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 04, 2003

Wilbert L. Clewis v. Anthony Hicks, M.D., Jeff Jury, Safeco Insurance Company of America, and Terry Wright

Wilbert L. Clewis sued his employer’s workers’ compensation carrier, Safeco Insurance Company, along with Terry Wright, Dr. Anthony Hicks, and Jeff Jury, alleging unauthorized disclosure of his confidential medical information. The information was released during preparations for an administrative hearing related to Clewis's workers' compensation claim. The trial court granted the appellees' motion for summary judgment and denied Clewis's motion for a new trial, concluding that Texas law did not recognize Clewis's specific invasion of privacy claim against non-doctors under the Medical Practice Act. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the summary judgment or the denial of the new trial motion.

Workers' CompensationMedical Records ConfidentialityInvasion of PrivacySummary JudgmentAppellate ProcedureTrial Court ErrorMedical Practice ActTexas LawExpert ReviewMotion for New Trial
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kelleher v. New York State Trooper Fearon

Plaintiff Eugene Kelleher brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Denzil Fearon, a New York State Trooper, for damages resulting from an unlawful strip search. A jury found Fearon liable and awarded Kelleher $125,000 in compensatory damages for emotional distress. Defendant moved for judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively, a new trial or remittitur. The court denied the motion for judgment as a matter of law, upholding the jury's finding that Fearon was not entitled to qualified immunity, as there was sufficient evidence to infer he lacked objective reasonable suspicion for the strip search. However, the court granted the motion for remittitur, reducing the jury's award to $25,000, citing a lack of corroborating medical evidence for Kelleher's emotional distress.

Strip SearchQualified ImmunityExcessive ForceEmotional Distress DamagesRemittiturJury AwardCivil RightsAutomobile PresumptionProbable CauseFalse Arrest
References
24
Case No. 01-18-00863-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 08, 2019

Charles Lee Farris, Jr. v. State

This dissenting opinion argues for the reversal of a conviction for murder, an "Old Code felony crime," on the grounds that the appellant was deprived of his constitutional right to a jury trial. The dissenting judge asserts that Article I, section 10 of the Texas Constitution provides an absolute mandate for a speedy public trial by an impartial jury in all criminal prosecutions, a mandate that has been consistently overlooked by the Court of Criminal Appeals. The opinion delves into the historical context of this provision, tracing its origins to the 1836 Texas Declaration of Rights and highlighting the framers' intent to protect individual liberties against governmental overreach, particularly contrasting with Mexican civil law. It critiques the legislative and judicial expansion of jury trial waivers, arguing they defy the clear constitutional requirement for Old Code felony prosecutions. The dissent concludes that, given the specific mandate for such cases, the appellant's conviction should be reversed and remanded for a jury trial.

Criminal ProsecutionJury Trial RightsTexas Constitutional LawOld Code FeloniesDissenting OpinionAppellate ReviewDue ProcessLegal InterpretationCriminal ProcedureWaiver of Jury Trial
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 08, 2005

Silsbee Hospital, Inc. v. George

Lonny George, an employee of Silsbee Hospital, Inc. (d/b/a Columbia Silsbee Doctors Hospital), was injured in 1996 and subsequently sued the Hospital for personal injuries, with a jury awarding him $1,000,000. The Hospital, a non-subscriber to workers' compensation insurance, argued that George had waived his common law rights to sue by participating in an employee benefit plan and signing a waiver agreement. The appellate court, applying contract construction rules, held that the waiver did not expressly relieve the Hospital of liability as it only applied to claims against the parent company, Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation. Furthermore, the court found harmful error in the trial court's refusal to strike two unequivocally biased veniremembers (Hazleton and Stevenson) for cause during jury selection, necessitating a new trial. Therefore, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings, declining to address the Hospital's complaints regarding the damage award.

Nonsubscriber employerEmployee waiverPersonal injury lawsuitNegligence claimsContract interpretationJury selection biasHarmful errorAppellate reversalRemand for new trialEmployee benefit plan
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Thomas

The appellant, H. B. Zachry Company, appealed a jury verdict that awarded the appellee workmen’s compensation benefits for total and permanent incapacity. The appeal raised concerns about the trial court's decision not to grant a mistrial, specifically regarding the appellee's failure to timely disclose Dr. A. E. Minyard as an expert medical witness during discovery. The appellant also challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's finding of total and permanent incapacity. The appellate court concluded there was no abuse of discretion by the trial court in allowing Dr. Minyard's testimony, noting that the medical evidence was thoroughly developed and Dr. Minyard's findings primarily offered a different conclusion from existing medical reports. Furthermore, the court affirmed the jury's findings on total and permanent incapacity, the date of injury, and the good cause for the delayed filing of the claim, ultimately overruling all seventeen assignments of error. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

Workmen's CompensationExpert Witness TestimonyDiscovery Rules ViolationRule 168 Texas Rules of Civil ProcedureTotal and Permanent IncapacitySufficiency of EvidenceJury MisconductAppellate ReviewIndustrial Accident BoardMedical Testimony
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 27, 2018

Saint-Jean v. Emigrant Mortg. Co.

This case involves a lawsuit by eight Black property owners against Emigrant Mortgage Company and Emigrant Bank, alleging predatory "STAR NINA" loans that targeted minority communities. Plaintiffs claimed these loans were designed to strip home equity by imposing an onerous 18% interest rate upon late payment, a calculated plan given the borrowers' low credit scores and lack of sophistication. A jury found Emigrant liable for violating the Fair Housing Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and New York City Human Rights Law, awarding compensatory damages. Following the verdict, both parties filed post-trial motions. The court granted in part and denied in part both defendants' and plaintiffs' motions, notably finding the Saintils' waiver unenforceable due to public policy and ordering a new trial on damages for all plaintiffs, citing inconsistencies and lack of clarity in the original awards.

Predatory LendingSubprime MortgagesRacial DiscriminationFair Housing ActEqual Credit Opportunity ActNew York City Human Rights LawJury VerdictPost-Trial MotionsDamagesNew Trial
References
46
Showing 1-10 of 15,635 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