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
Jul 14, 1981

J. A. R. Management Corp. v. Sweeney

J. A. R. Management Corp. sold an apartment building to J. R. R. Realty Co., allegedly violating a collective bargaining agreement with Local 32B-32J S.E.I.U., AFL-CIO by failing to give notice and ensure the buyer adopted the agreement. The union initiated arbitration against both J. A. R. and J. R. R. and filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against J. R. R. Petitioners J. A. R. and J. R. R. sought to vacate the arbitration notice, arguing NLRB pre-emption. The Supreme Court granted their motion. On appeal, the judgment was modified: the notice to arbitrate was vacated only for J. R. R. Realty Co., while the motion against J. A. R. Management Corp. was denied. Arbitration against J. A. R. is stayed pending the NLRB's resolution of claims against J. R. R., after which arbitration may proceed for any unresolved disputes arising from the collective bargaining agreement.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementNLRB Pre-emptionVacate Notice to ArbitrateEmployer-Union DisputeSale of BusinessSuccessor EmployerUnfair Labor PracticesStay of ArbitrationAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. 14-09-01046-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2010

950 Corbindale, L.P., 950 Corbindale Management, L.L.C., 9041 Katy Freeway, Ltd., 9041 Katy Freeway Management, L.L.C., 9039 Holdings Management, L.L.C., Lester Allison, and Richard Plessala v. Kotts Capital Holdings Limited Partnership and Kotts Captial Holdings, Inc.

This is an accelerated interlocutory appeal concerning the denial of a motion to stay litigation and compel arbitration. The appellees, Kotts Capital Holdings, had sought declaratory relief regarding partnership agreements. Appellants argued that the dispute fell within the scope of a valid arbitration agreement, despite a clause limiting awards to 'compensatory damages only.' The appellate court found that this limitation applied only to the type of damages, not the arbitrator's authority to grant declaratory relief. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's order, compelling arbitration.

Arbitration AgreementMotion to CompelDeclaratory JudgmentContract InterpretationPartnership DisputeScope of ArbitrationAppellate ProcedureTexas LawRemandInterlocutory Appeal
References
11
Case No. 14-18-00100-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 13, 2019

Denise Longoria v. CKR Property Management, LLC

This document is a dissenting opinion from the denial of a motion for en banc reconsideration. The case involves an appeal by Denise Longoria regarding the denial of her motion to compel arbitration against CKR Property Management, LLC. The dissent argues that the panel should have affirmed the trial court's ruling which denied Longoria's motion to compel arbitration. The core issue revolves around the duration and survivability of an at-will employment arbitration agreement, specifically whether an agreement made during a first period of employment extends to a subsequent period of employment or constitutes a lifelong obligation. The dissenting justice contends that the agreement's language refers to a singular employment relationship and that, without explicit and definite intent, it does not create new obligations beyond the original at-will employment. Furthermore, the dissent raises concerns about the substantive unconscionability of interpreting the agreement as a lifelong commitment, given that at-will employment was the sole consideration. It also points to procedural anomalies as an additional reason for en banc reconsideration.

Arbitration AgreementAt-Will EmploymentContract InterpretationEmployment LawAppellate ProcedureEn Banc ReconsiderationUnconscionabilityTexas LawFederal Arbitration ActDissenting Opinion
References
34
Case No. 13-13-00711-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 23, 2015

Octavio Raya v. Rio Management Company, LLC and Wyatt Hidalgo Farms, Inc.

Appellant Octavio Raya appealed the trial court's decision affirming an arbitrator's take-nothing judgment in favor of appellees Rio Management Company, LLC and Wyatt Hidalgo Farms, Inc. Raya, an employee of Rio, had signed an arbitration agreement and subsequently suffered injuries on Wyatt's property, leading him to sue both entities. He contended that Wyatt, an affiliated company, was not a proper party to the arbitration agreement due to a misnomer and lack of direct signatory status. The appellate court affirmed, ruling that Wyatt was bound by the arbitration agreement as an affiliated entity of Rio, and any misnomer did not invalidate the agreement. Consequently, Raya's claims against both Rio and Wyatt were properly subjected to arbitration.

Arbitration AgreementNonsignatory BindingCorporate AffiliationMisnomerFederal Arbitration ActSummary Judgment ConfirmationTake-Nothing JudgmentAppellate Review StandardContract FormationScope of Employment
References
23
Case No. 13-00-313-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 21, 2001

Montemayor, Rolando v. Chapa, Rolando, U.S.A., Waste-Management Resources, LLC, and Waste-Management of Texas, Inc., F/D/A U.S.A. Waste of Texas, Inc.

Rolando Montemayor, a temporary employee assigned to Waste Management, was injured in an automobile accident and received worker's compensation benefits through his general employer, Express Personnel Services. He subsequently sued Waste Management and its employee, Rolando Chapa, for negligence. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants, citing the borrowed servant and fellow servant doctrines, which bar common-law claims under the Texas Worker's Compensation Act's exclusive remedy provision. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, finding that Waste Management had the right of control over Montemayor, making him a borrowed servant, and Chapa a co-employee, thus upholding the summary judgment.

worker's compensationsummary judgmentborrowed servant doctrinefellow servant doctrinerespondeat superiortemporary employmentexclusive remedyTexas lawappellate reviewnegligence
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

District 2 Marine Engineers Beneficial Ass'n v. Puerto Rico Marine Management, Inc.

District 2, a marine engineers union, sued Puerto Rico Marine Management, Inc. (PRMMI) to compel arbitration after PRMMI terminated their collective bargaining agreement and discharged union members. PRMMI argued the agreement was terminable at will, while District 2 maintained it was still in effect, terminable only by the union. The court found both interpretations unpersuasive, ruling the agreement's extension implied a reasonable period for good faith negotiations and required reasonable notice for termination. Therefore, the court denied both parties' motions for summary judgment and PRMMI's motion to dismiss, ordering a factual hearing to determine the effectiveness of the termination, while making accrued benefit claims immediately arbitrable.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementContract TerminationLabor DisputeSummary JudgmentSubject Matter JurisdictionUnionEmployerGood Faith NegotiationsReasonable Notice
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Faulk Management Services v. Lufkin Industries, Inc.

Faulk Management Services initiated a declaratory judgment action to determine if it had a duty to indemnify and defend Lufkin Industries, Inc. under a written agreement. This arose from an underlying personal injury lawsuit filed by Alta V. Harrison, a Faulk employee, against Lufkin for an on-the-job injury. The trial court granted Lufkin's motion for summary judgment, compelling Faulk to indemnify and defend. Faulk appealed, arguing the agreement failed the express negligence test and the workers' compensation bar. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding the contract's terms sufficiently met both legal requirements.

IndemnityDeclaratory JudgmentExpress Negligence RuleWorkers Compensation BarContract InterpretationHold Harmless AgreementSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewNegligenceThird-Party Liability
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fludgate v. Management Technologies, Inc.

Barrington J. Fludgate sued Management Technologies, Inc. (MTI), Winter Partners, Inc. (WP), and Keith Williams, asserting claims under ERISA, New York labor law, and for wrongful interference with his employment agreement. Defendants sought to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for summary judgment on certain claims. Fludgate moved to amend his complaint and for an extension of time. The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss the ERISA claims, finding Fludgate's employment agreement did not establish an ERISA plan, thus lacking subject matter jurisdiction. Consequently, state law claims were also dismissed. However, Fludgate was granted leave to amend his complaint to include claims under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

ERISA ClaimsEmployment AgreementWrongful TerminationSubject Matter JurisdictionMotion to DismissSummary JudgmentLeave to AmendSecurities Exchange ActSeverance BenefitsEmployee Pension Benefits
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Martin v. SCI Management L.P.

The plaintiff, Rita Martin, filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against her former employers, SCI Management L.P. and SCI Funeral Services of New York, Inc., and her former supervisor, Peter D’Arienzo. The lawsuit alleged violations of Title VII, FMLA, FLSA, and New York and Westchester County Human Rights Laws. The defendants moved to compel arbitration based on an arbitration agreement in the plaintiff's employment contract. The court granted the defendants' motion, compelling arbitration and dismissing the complaint without prejudice, after rejecting the plaintiff's arguments regarding the unenforceability of the arbitration agreement due to concerns about costs, discovery limitations, and the availability of punitive damages.

Employment DiscriminationArbitration AgreementTitle VIIFMLAFLSANew York Human Rights LawWestchester County Human Rights LawFederal Arbitration ActMotion to Compel ArbitrationDismissal Without Prejudice
References
15
Case No. 09-16-00095-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 25, 2016

T.W. Odom Management Services, Ltd. v. Thomas Williford

Thomas Williford, an employee, sued T.W. Odom Management Services, Ltd. for negligence after a workplace injury. T.W. Odom, a non-subscriber to Texas's workers' compensation plan, had an ERISA-governed occupational injury plan and an arbitration agreement with Williford. Despite Williford receiving benefits under the plan, he filed a negligence suit, leading T.W. Odom to seek to compel arbitration. The trial court denied this motion, ruling Williford's claims were excluded from arbitration. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the arbitration agreement clearly and unmistakably delegated "gateway issues" concerning its interpretation and applicability to the arbitrator, thus the trial court erred in deciding the scope of arbitration.

Arbitration AgreementDelegation ClauseGateway IssuesArbitrabilityScope of ArbitrationEmployment ArbitrationFederal Arbitration ActERISANegligence ClaimNon-subscriber Benefits
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 6,528 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