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

Campaniello v. Board of Managers

This case involves a dispute between Thomas Campaniello, owner of two commercial condominium units, and the Board of Managers of the 225 East 57th Street Condominium. The dispute centers on the responsibility for repairing duct work connected to an auxiliary water tower serving only Campaniello's unit B, which the condominium disconnected. Campaniello filed a complaint alleging breach of contract, trespass, and partial eviction, claiming the condominium was responsible for repairs. The condominium moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing Campaniello was responsible for the maintenance of elements serving only his unit and that his claims lacked legal basis. The court granted the condominium's motion, dismissing all causes of action, including claims for punitive damages, finding Campaniello responsible for the unit's air-conditioning system maintenance.

Condominium LawProperty DisputeBreach of ContractTrespassPartial EvictionMotion to DismissBuilding Code ComplianceUnit Owner ResponsibilityCommon ElementsDeclarations and Bylaws
References
6
Case No. ADJ8094646
Regular
Jan 17, 2014

ALEJANDRINA BARRETO vs. OUT OF THE SHELL, SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY, REPUBLIC INDEMNITY COMPANY, PHARMAFINANCE, LLC, HEALTHCARE FINANCE MANAGEMENT, LLC

This case involves lien claimants PharmaFinance and Healthcare Finance Management, and their representatives Landmark Medical Management and Brian Hall, who sought reconsideration of a decision disallowing their liens for medical treatment. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to notice its intention to impose sanctions of up to $2,500 against the lien claimants and their representatives. This action is due to a pattern of allegedly filing petitions containing false statements about not receiving notices, which violates the Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Labor Code Section 5813. The Board found these claims not persuasive and indicative of a tactic to avoid responsibility.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSanctionsLien ClaimantsHearing RepresentativesIndustrial InjuryFindings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseNotice of IntentionLabor Code section 5813
References
0
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. 08-00-00114-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 22, 2002

SCM Management, Inc./Manuela Ortiz v. Ortiz, Manuela/SCM Management, Inc.

Manuela Ortiz, a housekeeper, sued SCM Management, Inc. for wrongful discharge under the Texas Worker's Compensation Act, alleging retaliation for her intent to file a worker's compensation claim due to worsening hand pain. A jury found in favor of Ortiz, awarding damages for lost wages and mental anguish, but the trial court excluded exemplary damages. SCM appealed, challenging the sufficiency of evidence for retaliatory discharge, lost wages, and mental anguish. Ortiz cross-appealed the denial of exemplary damages. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the findings for retaliatory discharge, lost wages, and mental anguish, but agreed that there was insufficient evidence for exemplary damages.

Worker's CompensationRetaliatory DischargeEmployment LawMental AnguishExemplary DamagesSufficiency of EvidenceLost WagesMitigation of DamagesTexas Labor CodeAppellate Review
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Home Management, Inc. v. Peavy

Justice HECHT dissents from the majority's decision, which imposes liability on Texas Home Management, Inc. (THM), an intermediate care facility, for the actions of Anthony Tyrone Dixon, a mentally retarded juvenile delinquent who killed Elizabeth Ann Peavy. Dixon was placed at Lakewood House, operated by THM, under the State's habilitation policy. HECHT argues that the Court's ruling wrongly forces liability on private care providers for risks they cannot be compensated for, thereby undermining state policy. The dissent highlights that THM had no legal means to confine Dixon, adhering to regulations for 'least restrictive habilitation setting' and allowing 'therapeutic visits'. HECHT contends that THM's only 'control' was to continue habilitation or return Dixon to the penal system, and it should not be held responsible for the tragic outcome while following state directives.

Mentally Retarded DelinquentsIntermediate Care FacilitiesState LiabilityPrivate Provider LiabilityHabilitation PolicyDissenting OpinionSummary JudgmentDuty of CareControl of ResidentsGovernmental Regulations
References
5
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 00302 [135 AD3d 572]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 2016

Domaszowec v. Residential Management Group LLC

Plaintiff Tracy Domaszowec's decedent died from a fall while cleaning a window on the 13th floor of an apartment building. The Appellate Division, First Department, modified a Supreme Court order, granting plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on her Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Residential Management Group LLC and 40 Fifth Avenue Corporation (40 Fifth defendants), the building owner and manager. The court found the decedent was engaged in "commercial window washing," thereby making Labor Law § 240 (1) applicable. The court affirmed the dismissal of Labor Law § 202 against Veronica Bulgari and Stephen Haimo due to lack of exclusive control, and common-law negligence claims against T&L Contracting of N.Y., Inc. and Greenpoint Woodworking Inc. due to the lack of an exception to the contractual obligation rule. Issues of fact precluded summary judgment on negligence claims against Panorama Windows, Ltd., and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was deemed inapplicable to certain defendants.

Window cleaner fatalityScaffold LawSummary judgment appealAppellate Division First DepartmentCommercial vs. routine window washingLabor Law applicabilityContractual tort liabilityRes ipsa loquitur in negligencePunitive damages dismissalExpert witness evidence
References
8
Case No. 08-07-00091-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 05, 2009

State Office of Risk Management v. Georgina Alonso

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed a no-evidence summary judgment granted in favor of Georgina Alonso in a worker's compensation case. SORM argued that the trial court erred in denying its motion for leave to file an untimely response and its motion for continuance, which included Dr. Steiner's affidavit, claiming good cause due to miscommunication with Alonso's counsel. The appellate court reviewed the trial court's ruling under an abuse of discretion standard, finding that SORM failed to demonstrate good cause for the late filing as required by Rule 5 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Consequently, the appellate court presumed the trial court did not consider the late-filed evidence and affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that SORM failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact.

Worker's CompensationSummary JudgmentAppellate ProcedureAbuse of DiscretionTimely FilingGood CauseNo-Evidence MotionContinuanceMedical ExpertTexas Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 5
References
13
Case No. 09-13-00237-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2014

Irika Shipping S.A. and Prosperity Management S.A. v. Quinton Henderson

Longshoreman Quinton Henderson sued Irika Shipping S.A. and Prosperity Management S.A. for negligence under 33 U.S.C. § 905(b) after a slip and fall injury on a vessel. A jury found all parties negligent, but the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment. The reversal was based on a jury charge error: the omission of language detailing the vessel owner's limited duty to intervene, and the stevedore's primary responsibility for employee safety. The court found this omission was likely to have caused an improper judgment, thus remanding the case for a new trial.

LongshoremanNegligenceMaritime Law33 U.S.C. § 905(b)Jury InstructionsDuty to InterveneAppellate ReviewSlip and FallVessel SafetyStevedore Liability
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 20, 1993

Olsen v. We'll Manage, Inc.

The case concerns an appeal by We'll Manage, Inc. from an order denying its cross motion for summary judgment in an action brought by plaintiff Gary Olsen under Labor Law §§ 240 and 241. We'll Manage, Inc. contended that Olsen was its special employee, providing evidence of direct supervision, work assignments, the right to fire him, and payment signed by its personnel, despite his wages being drawn from a general employer's account. The court found this established a special employment relationship. As Olsen received workers' compensation benefits from his general employer, he is statutorily barred from maintaining an action against the special employer. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the lower court's order, granted We'll Manage, Inc.'s cross motion, and dismissed the complaint against the appellant.

Special EmployeeWorkers' Compensation BarSummary JudgmentLabor LawDirect SupervisionControlAffidavitDeposition TestimonyGeneral EmployerAppellate Reversal
References
6
Case No. 14-09-00579-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 03, 2009

in Re Boxer Property Management Corporation and 9343 North Loop, L.P.

Boxer Property Management Corporation and 9343 North Loop, L.P. (Relators) sought a writ of mandamus to vacate a trial court order compelling the deposition of their corporate representative. The Relators contended that the deposition would improperly delve into attorney work product concerning their discovery responses to the Wells plaintiffs. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals found that the approved deposition questions were designed to investigate the methods used by counsel in searching for documents, which constitutes privileged attorney work product. Lacking concrete evidence of discovery abuse, the court determined the trial court abused its discretion. Consequently, the appellate court conditionally granted the writ of mandamus, ordering the trial court to vacate its prior order.

Discovery DisputeAttorney Work ProductPrivilegeMandamusCorporate RepresentativeDepositionTrial Court DiscretionAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionTexas Civil Procedure
References
19
Showing 1-10 of 4,743 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