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

Dallas Ry. & Terminal Co. v. Horton

M. C. Horton sued Dallas Railway & Terminal Company to recover damages for personal injuries to his wife, Mrs. Adeline Horton, sustained when her coat was caught while alighting from a street car, causing her to be thrown and dragged. The jury found the defendant negligent and awarded Horton $3,000. The Dallas Railway & Terminal Company appealed the judgment, raising three main issues: alleged double recovery allowed by the jury charge on damages, juror misconduct during deliberations, and alleged coercion of the jury by the trial court. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the jury charge, upholding the trial court's discretion regarding juror misconduct, and concluding that the court's instructions to the jury regarding conflicting answers were not coercive.

Personal InjuryStreet Car AccidentNegligenceDamagesJury MisconductCoercionAppellate ReviewTrial Court DiscretionCivil ProcedureLoss of Earning Capacity
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 1995

Wackenhut Corp. v. International Union, United Plant Guard Workers

Wackenhut Corporation, a security services provider, filed suit to vacate an arbitration award, while the International Union, United Plant Guard Workers of America, Amalgamated Local 515 counterclaimed to enforce it. The dispute arose from Wackenhut's termination of employee Fernando T. Coelho after Consolidated Edison Company revoked his site access to a nuclear facility. An arbitrator ruled that Wackenhut violated the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) by terminating Coelho without just cause, awarding him back pay, benefits, and reinstatement. The District Court, presided over by Judge Sprizzo, affirmed the arbitrator's finding of a CBA violation, concluding that 'relieve from duty' differed from 'discharge for just cause'. However, the court vacated the portions of the award granting back pay, benefits, and reinstatement at another facility, holding that the arbitrator exceeded his contractual authority. The court enforced the arbitrator's directive for Wackenhut to renew efforts to persuade Con Ed to reinstate Coelho's security clearance.

ArbitrationVacatur of Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee TerminationSite Access RevocationManagement Rights ClauseJust CauseBack Pay DisputeEmployee ReinstatementJudicial Review of Arbitration
References
25
Case No. 03-03-00587-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 20, 2004

Luzstella Arbelaez v. Just Brakes Corporation

This is a summary judgment case where Luzstella Arbelaez appealed the grant of summary judgment in favor of Just Brakes Corporation. Arbelaez sued Just Brakes for vicarious liability after an employee, Brian Paul, collided with her while on a breakfast run for his manager and co-workers. The district court ruled that Paul was not within the course and scope of his employment. The appellate court reviewed the decision de novo, finding that Just Brakes failed to prove as a matter of law that Paul was not acting within the course and scope of his employment, citing evidence that the errand was a 'first assignment,' routinely done, benefited the employer, and Paul was reimbursed and 'on the clock.' Consequently, the court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings, stating that genuine fact issues exist regarding Paul's employment scope.

Summary JudgmentVicarious LiabilityCourse and Scope of EmploymentEmployee NegligenceAppellate ReviewDe Novo ReviewFact IssueEmployer BenefitDeviation from EmploymentTexas Law
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Just Energy Texas I Corp. v. Texas Workforce Commission and Cedric Thomas

Just Energy Texas I Corp. appealed the dismissal of its suit against the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) and Cedric Thomas for lack of jurisdiction. Just Energy challenged the trial court's ruling that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The core issue revolved around whether Just Energy was 'aggrieved' by the TWC's decision reversing an initial denial of unemployment benefits to Thomas, thereby waiving TWC's sovereign immunity. The court concluded that Just Energy's potential future injuries, such as chargebacks or other claims, were not 'actual and immediate' losses required to be considered 'aggrieved' under the Texas Labor Code. Therefore, the Commission's sovereign immunity was not waived, and the trial court correctly dismissed the case for want of subject-matter jurisdiction. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

JurisdictionSovereign ImmunityUnemployment BenefitsJudicial ReviewAggrieved PartySubject-Matter JurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Labor CodeAdministrative RemediesIndependent Contractor
References
17
Case No. 13-05-055-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 11, 2006

Scott Cerre v. Odfjell Terminals (Houston) LP

Scott Cerre, an employee of Odfjell Terminals (Houston) LP, was injured on the job and subsequently filed a workers' compensation claim. He was later terminated under Odfjell's absence-control policy after taking a six-month leave of absence. Cerre sued Odfjell, alleging retaliatory discharge and discrimination in violation of chapter 451 of the Texas Labor Code. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Odfjell. On appeal, Cerre contended that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on both his discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that Odfjell successfully negated elements of the discrimination claim and that Cerre's termination was due to a uniformly enforced absence-control policy, not retaliation.

Retaliatory DischargeDiscrimination ClaimHostile Work EnvironmentSummary Judgment AffirmationTexas Labor Code Chapter 451Absence Control PolicyEmployment TerminationAppellate ReviewCausal ConnectionHarassment
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sines v. Opportunities For Broome, Inc.

Petitioner, a foreman, was dismissed from employment by a not-for-profit corporation in December 1987 for alleged misconduct, including sleeping on the job. After exhausting internal grievance procedures, which upheld the dismissal in September 1988, petitioner initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking reinstatement and back pay. The court determined that an article 78 proceeding was appropriate against the not-for-profit corporation. Petitioner challenged the termination on procedural grounds and argued the finding of just cause was arbitrary and the penalty disproportionate. The court found no merit in petitioner's procedural claims and concluded that the finding of just cause was not arbitrary and capricious, and the penalty was not disproportionately harsh. The determination was confirmed, and the petition dismissed.

CPLR Article 78Employment TerminationGrievance ProcedureNot-for-Profit CorporationArbitrary and CapriciousJust CauseWorkplace MisconductSleeping on JobFailure to SuperviseDue Process
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Asset Protection & Security Services v. Service Employees International Union, Local 200 United

The Union appealed from an order that partially vacated an arbitration award. The arbitrator had determined that Asset Protection & Security Services, LP (APSS) lacked just cause to discharge an employee and ordered reinstatement with back pay. The Supreme Court vacated the award entirely. This appellate court found that the Supreme Court erred in vacating the arbitrator's finding of no just cause for termination, thereby reversing that part of the order. However, the court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by reinstating the employee and awarding back pay and benefits, citing the Collective Bargaining Agreement's (CBA) limitations on remedies in cases involving ICE-mandated actions. Two judges dissented in part.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployee DischargeJust CauseArbitrator AuthorityJudicial ReviewPublic PolicyReinstatementBack PayCPLR
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Newsday, Inc. v. Ross

Richard Thone was discharged for falsifying reports, leading to a complex series of administrative and judicial proceedings. Initially denied unemployment benefits, a referee granted them, but the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed, finding misconduct. Concurrently, Thone filed a claim for a termination allowance, which the Industrial Commissioner ordered the employer to pay. The employer's appeal to the Industrial Board of Appeals confirmed this order, ruling against "just cause" for discharge. However, the higher court ultimately annulled the Industrial Board of Appeals' determination, concluding that the Industrial Commissioner should have been collaterally estopped from relitigating the "just cause" issue, given the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's prior finding of misconduct, thereby denying Thone's claim for severance pay.

collateral estoppelres judicataadministrative lawunemployment insurance benefitsseverance payemployee misconductjust cause for dischargefalsification of recordsIndustrial CommissionerUnemployment Insurance Appeal Board
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 1987

M. Slavin & Sons, Ltd. v. Cirillo

This case concerns a proceeding initiated by M. Slavin & Sons, Ltd. (petitioner) under CPLR article 75 to vacate an arbitration award. The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied the petitioner's request and granted the respondent, George Medina's, cross-petition to confirm the award. M. Slavin & Sons, Ltd. had discharged employee George Medina, alleging he "goofed off" and took excessive time during deliveries. The arbitrator concluded that M. Slavin & Sons, Ltd. failed to prove just cause for the discharge, noting discrepancies in delivery records and deeming Medina's brief stop at Pitkin Avenue a de minimis breach. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, emphasizing that arbitration awards can only be vacated if the arbitrator acts irrationally, not merely due to mistakes of fact or law, which was not found in this instance. The court upheld the arbitrator's finding that Slavin lacked just cause for Medina's termination.

ArbitrationVacaturArbitration AwardJust CauseDischargeEmployment LawCPLR Article 75Judicial ReviewFactual ErrorLegal Error
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Billings v. County of St. Lawrence

The petitioner, an unnamed Deputy Sheriff and correction officer for the St. Lawrence County Sheriff’s Department, was terminated after a disciplinary hearing. He was found guilty of unprofessional conduct for inappropriately delivering tobacco to an inmate and for lying during the subsequent investigation, though not for causing an inmate disturbance. Despite a Hearing Officer's recommendation for a two-month suspension, the Undersheriff of St. Lawrence County opted for termination, effective April 22, 1987. The court, in this CPLR article 78 proceeding, confirmed the determination, finding the evidence sufficient and the termination penalty not excessive given the serious nature of the misconduct in a prison setting and the petitioner's relatively short, unblemished service record.

MisconductTerminationDeputy SheriffCorrection OfficerInmate ConductDisciplinary ActionSubstantial EvidencePenalty ReviewUnprofessional ConductLack of Candor
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 10,282 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