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
Oct 24, 1990

Christiansen v. Silver Lake Contracting Corp.

Einar Christiansen and other plaintiffs appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Westchester County, which granted summary judgment to the defendants, Silver Lake Contracting Corp. and Anthony P. Abbondola, in a personal injury action. Christiansen was injured when struck by a truck owned by Silver Lake and operated by Abbondola. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the complaint, finding Abbondola immune under Workers’ Compensation Law due to common employment with Christiansen. The Appellate Division modified the order, affirming summary judgment for Abbondola but denying it for Silver Lake, allowing the case to proceed against Silver Lake based on potential independent negligence in equipping and maintaining the truck. The court also converted cross-claims into third-party complaints and severed the action against Silver Lake.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewVicarious LiabilityIndependent NegligenceThird-Party ComplaintContribution and IndemnificationWorkers' Compensation ImmunityTruck AccidentEmployer Liability
References
12
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 03444
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2020

Schoch v. Lake Champlain OB-GYN, P.C.

Kim E. Schoch, a certified nurse midwife, was employed by Lake Champlain OB-GYN, P.C. and covered by a professional liability insurance policy from Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company (MLMIC), with the employer paying all premiums. Following MLMIC's conversion to a stock insurance company, a cash consideration was to be distributed to eligible policyholders. Schoch, as the named insured, was deemed the policyholder, but Lake Champlain OB-GYN objected, claiming entitlement due to its premium payments, a claim upheld by the Supreme Court based on unjust enrichment. The Appellate Division reversed, ruling that Schoch, as the policyholder, was legally entitled to the consideration per statute and MLMIC's conversion plan. The court found that the demutualization proceeds were an unexpected windfall not explicitly covered by the employment agreement, and that Lake Champlain OB-GYN's unjust enrichment claim failed because Schoch's entitlement was based on law, not mistake or fraudulent conduct. Consequently, Schoch was declared solely entitled to the $74,747.03 cash consideration.

DemutualizationInsurance PolicyPolicyholder RightsUnjust EnrichmentProfessional LiabilityEmployment BenefitsAppellate DivisionContractual InterpretationCash ConsiderationMutual to Stock Conversion
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sanders Oil & Gas, Ltd. v. Big Lake Kay Constr., Inc.

Sanders Oil & Gas, Ltd. appealed a trial court judgment favoring Big Lake Kay Construction, Inc. for services rendered. The trial court awarded Big Lake $25,614.61 and $7,200.00 in attorney fees based on a breach of oral contract. Sanders Oil raised three issues on appeal: Big Lake's alleged failure to satisfy a condition precedent, insufficient evidence for the damages award, and spoliation of evidence. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's ruling, finding no condition precedent, legally and factually sufficient evidence for damages, and no duty to preserve evidence for spoliation. The core dispute involved unpaid invoices for oil-field services and the subsequent factoring of these invoices to Security Business Capital, LLC.

Breach of Oral ContractSufficiency of EvidenceCondition PrecedentSpoliation of EvidenceDamages AwardFactoring InvoicesOil-field ServicesAppellate ReviewBench TrialAttorney Fees
References
44
Case No. 14-15-00695-cv
Regular Panel Decision
May 19, 2015

Garden Ridge, L.P. v. Clear Lake Center, L.P.

This is an appeal brief filed by Clear Lake Center, L.P. (Cross-Appellant/Appellee) against Garden Ridge, L.P. (Appellant/Cross-Appellee). The case stems from a dispute over alleged overpayments of management fees under a commercial real property lease. The trial court's judgment awarded Garden Ridge L.P. $594,700 in damages and $350,000 in attorneys' fees. Clear Lake Center, L.P. argues that Garden Ridge's claims are precluded by affirmative defenses such as waiver, ratification, novation, accord and satisfaction, and estoppel. They also contend that the trial court erred by excluding critical evidence and that the findings of liability and damages are unsustainable. Clear Lake Center, L.P. requests the appellate court to reverse the judgment and render judgment in its favor, or, in the alternative, remand the case for a new trial.

Contractual DisputeCommercial Real Estate LeaseManagement Fee OverchargesAffirmative DefensesEquitable EstoppelParol Evidence RuleBreach of ContractAttorneys' Fees CalculationStatute of LimitationsAppellate Procedure
References
69
Case No. 14-09-00950-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 21, 2010

Galveston Independent School District v. Clear Lake Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC

Clear Lake Rehabilitation Hospital, L.L.C. sued Galveston Independent School District (GISD) for breach of contract and violation of the federal Public Health Service Act (PHSA) concerning employee medical coverage. GISD appealed the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction, asserting governmental immunity. The appellate court ruled that GISD's provision of health insurance was a governmental function, reversing the trial court's decision on the breach of contract claim and remanding it for Clear Lake to amend its pleadings to establish third-party beneficiary status. The court also found Clear Lake lacked independent standing as an "individual" under the PHSA, leading to the dismissal of that claim for want of jurisdiction.

Governmental ImmunityBreach of ContractPublic Health Service ActPHSACOBRAThird-Party BeneficiaryInterlocutory AppealSubject-Matter JurisdictionSchool District ImmunityHealth Insurance Coverage
References
49
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 04212
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 23, 2020

Matter of Troy Sand & Gravel Co., Inc. v. Town of Sand Lake

This case involves appeals by multiple petitioners challenging the Town of Sand Lake's enactment of Local Law No. 4 (2017), a new zoning ordinance. Petitioners, including mining companies and residents, sought to annul the law, arguing violations of SEQRA, inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, and preemption by MLRL. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions, but the Appellate Division partially modified the judgment. The Appellate Division determined some petitioners had standing and annulled specific sections of Local Law No. 4 related to SEQRA powers and road use regulations. However, the court affirmed the remainder of the judgment, upholding the Town Board's SEQRA compliance, consistency with the comprehensive plan, and the constitutionality of most of Local Law No. 4, including setback and reclamation bond requirements.

Zoning OrdinanceState Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA)Mined Land Reclamation Law (MLRL)Standing (Legal)Comprehensive PlanDeclaratory JudgmentCPLR Article 78Local Law AnnulmentZoning Map InconsistencyLegislative Delegation
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thomann v. Lakes Regional MHMR Center

Susan Lorraine Thomann appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Lakes Regional MHMR Center, dismissing her claims of employment discrimination and retaliation. Thomann, a house parent, was terminated after undergoing knee and back surgeries that resulted in a permanent lifting restriction, preventing her from performing essential job functions. She alleged discrimination based on disability and retaliation for an internal complaint. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that Thomann failed to produce sufficient evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact that she was disabled under the Texas Labor Code or that her termination was retaliatory. The court noted that Lakes Regional had offered her an alternative receptionist position, which she declined.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationDisability DiscriminationSummary JudgmentTexas Labor CodeLifting RestrictionsReasonable AccommodationEssential Job FunctionsMajor Life ActivityRecord of Disability
References
51
Case No. 03-03-00154-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 16, 2003

City of Marshall and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Formerly Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission) v. City of Uncertain Caddo Lake Area Chamber of Commerce and Tourism Greater Caddo Lake Association Caddo Lake Institute John T. Echols And Barry L. Bennick

The Texas Court of Appeals reviewed a district court's decision regarding a water permit amendment sought by the City of Marshall. Marshall's application to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) involved an interbasin water transfer and the authorization for industrial water use. The TCEQ approved the amendment without a contested-case hearing, which the district court reversed. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling that an evidentiary hearing was necessary for the industrial use amendment and that the executive director lacked authority to approve it without such a hearing. However, the court reversed the district court's finding that the interbasin transfer also required notice and a hearing, determining it fell under a statutory exemption.

Environmental LawWater RightsInterbasin TransferIndustrial UseContested Case HearingAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewStatutory InterpretationSummary JudgmentTexas Water Code
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Balsam Lake Anglers Club v. Department of Environmental Conservation

The petitioner, Balsam Lake Anglers Club, initiated a hybrid proceeding challenging a Unit Management Plan (UMP) for the Balsam Lake Mountain Wild Forest area. The challenge focused on alleged violations of Article XIV of the New York State Constitution concerning timber removal, infringement on easements, and non-compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The court determined that the UMP did not violate the State Constitution or the petitioner's property rights as the timber cutting was deemed insubstantial and consistent with public use. However, the court found that the respondents, particularly the Department of Environmental Conservation, failed to adhere to SEQRA's procedural and substantive requirements by issuing a negative declaration without a comprehensive 'hard look' or a reasoned elaboration of environmental impacts. Consequently, the petition was granted in part regarding the SEQRA violation, and the matter was remitted to the Department of Environmental Conservation for further proceedings consistent with the ruling.

Environmental LawSEQRAUnit Management PlanForest PreserveArticle XIVNew York State ConstitutionTimber CuttingEasementsWild Forest LandsJudicial Review
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Towers of Town Lake Condominium Ass'n v. Rouhani

Venus Rouhani, a dentist, sued Towers of Town Lake Condominium Association, Inc. for negligence after slipping and falling on a wet, enamel-painted pool deck. Rouhani suffered significant injuries, including a comminuted fracture and avascular necrosis, which led to her inability to practice dentistry. The jury found the Association negligent and awarded substantial damages. The Association appealed, challenging the sufficiency of evidence for knowledge, causation, and damages, as well as the refusal of an unavoidable accident instruction. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the evidence supported the jury's findings on negligence, proximate cause, and the damages awarded, and that there was no abuse of discretion in the jury charge.

NegligencePremises LiabilitySlip and FallPersonal InjuryCondominium AssociationPool Deck SafetyFuture Earning CapacityExpert TestimonyAppellate ReviewDamages
References
42
Showing 1-10 of 143 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