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. 00-80050A
Regular Panel Decision
May 23, 2000

Victory Markets, Inc. v. NYS Unemployment Insurance (In Re Victory Markets Inc.)

Victory Markets, Inc. (VMI) and Victory Markets, LLC (LLC) initiated an adversary proceeding against the New York State Unemployment Insurance Division of the Department of Labor, challenging the Department's transfer of VMI's unemployment insurance tax experience rating to new owners following VMI's Chapter 11 reorganization. VMI argued this transfer violated its reorganization plan and negatively impacted funds available for creditors. The Department moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, contending the dispute involved non-debtor parties and state law, and was furthermore precluded by the Tax Injunction Act. The Bankruptcy Court, presided over by Chief Judge STEPHEN D. GERLING, granted the Department's motion, finding it lacked jurisdiction under 'arising in,' 'arising under,' or 'related to' doctrines, as the matter concerned a state agency's application of state law against non-debtors with a remote connection to the bankruptcy estate. The court also emphasized the availability of a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy in state courts, which barred federal intervention.

BankruptcySubject Matter JurisdictionTax Injunction ActNew York Labor LawUnemployment Insurance TaxChapter 11 ReorganizationAdversary ProceedingState Tax DisputeNon-Debtor PartiesExperience Rating Transfer
References
20
Case No. 11-06-00048-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 21, 2006

Midland Central Appraisal District and Midland County Appraisal Review Board v. Plains Marketing, L.P., a Texas Limited Partnership, and Plains Marketing GP Inc., General Partner

This ad valorem tax suit involves Plains Marketing, L.P. appealing the tax assessment on its crude oil inventory accounts. The Midland Central Appraisal District and Midland County Appraisal Review Board challenged the trial court's jurisdiction, asserting that Plains failed to exhaust administrative remedies. The trial court denied their challenge. The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that Plains had sufficiently exhausted its administrative remedies because the exemption claim was thoroughly discussed and determined by the Appraisal Review Board, despite initial protest notice deficiencies. The core issue revolved around whether oil stored in tank farms for future delivery constituted taxable inventory or was exempt under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Property TaxAd ValoremAdministrative RemediesJurisdictionExhaustion DoctrineInterstate CommerceOil InventoryAppraisal Review BoardTexas LawAppellate Review
References
35
Case No. NO. 01-16-00724-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2018

LMMM Houston 41, Ltd., LMMM Houston 41, Ltd, Dba La Michoacana Meat Market 41 v. Jesus Santibanez

This appeal arises from a premises liability suit where Jesus Santibanez slipped and fell on grease at La Michoacana Meat Market. A jury found La Michoacana Meat Market negligent, awarding Santibanez damages, including $120,000 for future medical expenses. La Michoacana Meat Market appealed, challenging jury instructions and the sufficiency of evidence, while Santibanez cross-appealed the reduction of his future medical expenses via JNOV. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the jury instructions and upholding the JNOV due to insufficient evidence to support the jury's original $120,000 award for future medical expenses.

Premises LiabilitySlip and FallPersonal InjuryJury InstructionsLegal SufficiencyFuture Medical ExpensesJudgment Notwithstanding VerdictInviteeOrdinary CareConcealed Danger
References
43
Case No. 2015-02-0193; 2015-02-0183
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 04, 2015

Seiferth, Stephen v. Ingles Markets, Inc.

In these consolidated interlocutory appeals, employees Robin Moore and Stephen Seiferth alleged respiratory injuries due to repeated pesticide exposure at their workplace, Ingles Markets, Inc. The employer provided an initial emergency room evaluation but failed to offer a panel of physicians. Following expedited hearings, the trial court ordered the employer to provide a physician panel but denied temporary disability benefits. The employer appealed, arguing lack of causation and disputed injury dates, but failed to provide a hearing transcript or sufficiently develop their arguments. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, presuming it was supported by sufficient evidence, and remanded the cases for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationPesticide ExposureRespiratory InjuriesNeurological ProblemsInterlocutory AppealExpedited HearingPanel of PhysiciansTemporary Disability BenefitsCausationSufficiency of Evidence
References
3
Case No. 2015-02-0193, 2015-02-0183
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 04, 2015

Moore, Robin v. Ingles Markets, Inc.

In these consolidated interlocutory appeals, employees Robin Moore and Stephen Seiferth alleged respiratory injuries from pesticide exposure at Ingles Markets, Inc. The employer failed to provide a panel of physicians, leading to an expedited hearing where the trial court mandated a physician panel but denied temporary disability benefits. Ingles Markets appealed, disputing causation and injury dates, but provided no transcript or evidence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, presuming sufficient evidence, and remanded the cases for further proceedings.

Respiratory InjuriesPesticide ExposureWorkers' Compensation BenefitsInterlocutory AppealsPanel of PhysiciansTemporary DisabilityCausationSufficiency of EvidenceAppellate ProcedureConsolidated Cases
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United Food & Commercial Workers v. Appletree Markets, Inc. (In Re Appletree Markets, Inc.)

The court considered an appeal from the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) challenging a bankruptcy court's order that rejected their collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) with AppleTree Markets, Inc., the debtor. AppleTree sought to dismiss the appeal as moot due to the substantial consummation of its Chapter 11 reorganization plan and the subsequent expiration of the CBAs, also arguing res judicata. The District Court denied AppleTree's motion to dismiss, finding that effective appellate relief remained possible and that res judicata did not apply given the UFCW's timely appeal. On the merits, the court affirmed the bankruptcy court's rejection of the CBAs, concluding that the debtor's proposed modifications were necessary for a successful reorganization and were fair and equitable to all affected parties.

Bankruptcy LawCollective BargainingLabor RelationsChapter 11 ReorganizationContract RejectionAppellate ProcedureMootness DoctrineRes JudicataDebtor-in-PossessionUnion Rights
References
15
Case No. 14-07-00787-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 06, 2009

Virginia Power Energy Marketing, Inc and Dominion Resources, Inc v. Apache Corporation

This case concerns a business dispute over force majeure clauses in a natural-gas supply contract between Apache Corporation (seller) and Virginia Power Energy Marketing, Inc. (VPEM), the purchaser. Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, Apache invoked force majeure and curtailed deliveries to VPEM, leading to a lawsuit. The trial court granted summary judgment for Apache, excusing its performance. On appeal, the court affirmed the summary judgment regarding deliveries to the Tennessee L-500 point, finding performance excused due to pipeline damage. However, it reversed and remanded the summary judgment concerning the Transco-65 delivery point, identifying a factual dispute regarding whether Apache's 'gas supply' was genuinely lost, especially given its spot-market sales and disproportionate deliveries to other customers.

force majeurenatural gas contracthurricanessummary judgmentcontract interpretationreasonable efforts clausegas supplycommercial impracticabilityUCCTexas law
References
29
Case No. 03-98-00083-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 22, 1998

Tana Oil and Gas Corporation and Teco Gas Marketing Company v. Garth C. Bates

This case is an interlocutory appeal from the Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin, regarding a class certification order. Appellants Tana Oil and Gas Corporation and Teco Gas Marketing Company challenged the certification of a class represented by Garth C. Bates and Richard G. Cernosek. The class action alleges breach of contract related to oil and gas royalties and breach of the implied covenant to market gas. Tana argued the trial court abused its discretion in finding commonality, predominance, and superiority for class certification. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order, finding no abuse of discretion in the preliminary ruling on merits or the findings supporting class certification.

Class ActionOil and Gas RoyaltiesBreach of ContractImplied Covenant to MarketClass CertificationCommonalityPredominanceSuperiorityInterlocutory AppealAbuse of Discretion
References
24
Case No. 02-16-00128-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 21, 2016

in Re Midwestern Cattle Marketing, LLC

Midwestern Cattle Marketing, LLC (Relator/Plaintiff) initiated a lawsuit against Tony E. Lyon d/b/a Lyon Farms, Owen Lyon, and Monna Lyon (Defendants) to recover funds lost due to an alleged fraudulent cattle-buying scheme, involving a $5 million bounced check and $3.7 million in unauthorized checks. Northwest Cattle Feeders, L.L.C. and Riley Livestock, Inc. (Intervenors) sought to join the suit, claiming they were also victims of the same scheme and seeking $800,000 in damages related to cattle. Plaintiff filed a motion to strike the intervention, arguing lack of justiciable interest, potential multiplication of issues, and non-essential nature of the intervention, with an alternative request for severance. Intervenors countered that their claims were intrinsically linked to the main lawsuit, involved identical parties and a similar scheme, and that intervention would enhance judicial efficiency and protect their interest in seized cattle. The Court, presided over by Judge John Fostel, ultimately denied Plaintiff's motion to strike the intervention and the alternative motion to sever.

FraudCattle SchemeInterventionMotion to StrikeSeveranceAgencyUnjust EnrichmentConversionBreach of ContractMandamus
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Geltzer v. Artists Marketing Corp. (In Re Cassandra Group)

Robert L. Geltzer, the Chapter 7 Trustee for The Cassandra Group, initiated this action to avoid a $300,000 transfer from the Debtor to Artists Marketing Corporation (AMC), Lawrence E. Bathgate, and The Bathgate Group. The Trustee alleged the transfer constituted a fraudulent conveyance under the Bankruptcy Code and New York Debtor and Creditor Law, and also sought recovery for unjust enrichment. The court found that The Cassandra Group was insolvent at the time of the transfer and that the transfer lacked fair consideration and good faith. The defendants, AMC, Bathgate, and The Bathgate Group, were deemed to have benefited from the transfer despite their role in allowing a key celebrity (DiCaprio) to rescind an agreement without legal basis, which contributed to the failure of the AMC venture. Consequently, the court ruled that the $300,000 transfer is avoidable and awarded prejudgment interest to the Trustee.

BankruptcyFraudulent ConveyanceConstructive FraudIntentional FraudUnjust EnrichmentInsolvent DebtorPrejudgment InterestChapter 7New York Debtor and Creditor LawEscrow Agreement
References
28
Showing 1-10 of 793 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