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. 13-08-00589-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 10, 2010

National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa and Industrial Risk Insurers v. John Zink Company Fisher Controls Company, Inc. Fisher Controls International, Inc. Fisher Controls Installation and Service Company And Valtek, Inc.

This litigation, stemming from refinery explosions and fires in the 1980s, involved an appeal by National Union Fire Insurance Company and Industrial Risk Insurers (the Insurers) against various contractors (the Contractors). The Insurers, as subrogees of Valero Energy Corporation, sought damages for product liability, negligence, breach of contract, and Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) violations. The core legal dispute centered on whether the Contractors qualified as 'subcontractors' under a master contract between Valero and M.W. Kellogg Construction Company, which contained extensive waiver and release provisions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's final summary judgment, concluding that the Contractors were indeed subcontractors, the express negligence doctrine did not apply to the post-act release, and Valero had validly waived its DTPA claims, thereby binding its subrogees.

Contractual WaiversSubrogation RightsSummary Judgment AppealExpress Negligence RuleDeceptive Trade Practices ActParol Evidence Rule ApplicationJudicial AdmissionsConstruction ContractsInsurance LitigationThird-Party Beneficiary
References
31
Case No. 01-21-00285-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 2023

GE Oil & Gas Pressure Control, L.P. v. Carrizo Oil & Gas, Inc.

This is an insurance subrogation case where Gemini Insurance Company, on behalf of its insured Carrizo Oil & Gas, Inc. (Carrizo), sued GE Oil & Gas Pressure Control, L.P. (GE) for damages from a well blowout. Carrizo alleged negligence, breach of contract, product liability, and breach of warranty. GE counterclaimed for Carrizo's negligence and indemnification. A jury found both parties negligent, but the trial court later disregarded Carrizo's negligence finding and awarded Carrizo over $2.5 million. On appeal, GE challenged Carrizo's standing, the disregard of the jury's verdict, and the enforceability of indemnity provisions. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding Carrizo had standing, GE failed to provide necessary expert testimony for Carrizo's negligence, and the indemnity clauses were unenforceable due to lack of signatory authority.

Oil and GasWell BlowoutNegligenceBreach of ContractProduct LiabilityBreach of WarrantyInsurance SubrogationIndemnity ClauseFair Notice RuleExpress Negligence
References
71
Case No. NO. 14-13-00117-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 04, 2015

MEMC Pasadena, Inc. v. Riddle Power, LLC and Triad Electric and Controls, Inc.

MEMC Pasadena, Inc. sustained damages due to an electrical accident at its industrial plant, causing a shutdown and loss of production. MEMC sued its electrical contractor, Triad Electric and Controls, Inc., and Triad’s subcontractor, Riddle Power, LLC, alleging breach of contract against Triad and negligence against both. Following a jury trial, MEMC was awarded damages against Riddle, but a take-nothing judgment for Triad. On appeal, MEMC challenged various aspects of the trial, including the sufficiency of evidence and jury charges. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the jury's findings on contract terms, estoppel, and MEMC's comparative negligence, and applying the economic loss rule to bar MEMC's negligence claim against Triad.

Electrical AccidentIndustrial Plant ShutdownBreach of ContractNegligence ClaimSubcontractor LiabilityJury Verdict ReviewLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceFactual Sufficiency of EvidenceEconomic Loss RuleComparative Responsibility
References
46
Case No. NO. 01-11-00079-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 31, 2013

Fairways Offshore Exploration, Inc. v. Patterson Services, Inc. and Cudd Pressure Control, Inc.

Fairways Offshore Exploration, Inc. appealed a trial court's judgment favoring Patterson Services, Inc. and Cudd Pressure Control, Inc. in a negligence and breach of contract dispute stemming from a sour natural gas well incident. Fairways challenged the sufficiency of Patterson's pleadings and expert testimony, damage awards, and asserted Patterson breached an express warranty and Cudd was negligent. Cudd filed a cross-issue regarding its equipment damages. The appellate court modified the judgment to reinstate Cudd's equipment damages, affirmed the judgment for Cudd on breach of contract, reversed Patterson's negligence claim, and reversed and remanded Patterson's breach of contract claim for a new trial.

Sour gas wellNegligenceBreach of contractExpress warrantySulfide-stress crackingNitrogen blanketT95 pipingEquipment rentalDamagesExpert testimony
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

EPGT Texas Pipeline, L.P. v. Harris County Flood Control District

EPGT Texas Pipeline, L.P. (PG&E) appealed a summary judgment granted to the Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) regarding damages to PG&E's gas pipeline during a drainage excavation project. The court affirmed summary judgment on PG&E's negligence and strict liability claims, concluding that HCFCD's immunity was not waived under the Texas Tort Claims Act because the damage was caused by an independent contractor. Summary judgment on the breach of contract and declaratory judgment claims was also affirmed, as PG&E was not deemed an intended third-party beneficiary. However, the court reversed the summary judgment on the inverse condemnation claim, dismissing it without prejudice due to the trial court's lack of exclusive jurisdiction, which lies with Harris County Courts at Law.

Sovereign ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActIndependent ContractorNegligenceStrict LiabilityBreach of ContractThird-Party BeneficiaryInverse CondemnationJurisdictionSummary Judgment
References
50
Case No. 01-02-01056-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 12, 2004

PG&E Texas Pipeline, L.P. v. Harris County Flood Control District & Ramex Construction Co., Inc.

EPGT Texas Pipeline, L.P. (PG&E) appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD). PG&E sought damages for pipeline displacement caused by HCFCD's drainage excavation project. The court determined that the Texas Tort Claims Act did not waive HCFCD's sovereign immunity for tort claims, as the damage was caused by an independent contractor. While the Texas Water Code waived immunity for breach of contract, PG&E was not an intended third-party beneficiary. Consequently, the court affirmed the summary judgment for negligence, strict liability, breach of contract, and declaratory judgment claims. However, it reversed and dismissed without prejudice the inverse condemnation claim due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction in the trial court.

Sovereign ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActIndependent ContractorBreach of ContractThird-Party BeneficiaryInverse CondemnationJurisdictionSummary JudgmentPipeline DamageDrainage Project
References
46
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 05, 1999

Light v. Antedeminico

Roger Light, a maintenance worker for Pawling Corp., initiated this action against Anthony Antedeminico d/b/a Tony’s Construction, a subcontractor, seeking damages for personal injuries sustained after falling into an excavated pit. The Supreme Court, Dutchess County, initially denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment to dismiss the common-law negligence claim, maintaining that triable issues of fact existed regarding the defendant's potential negligence. Upon reargument, the Supreme Court adhered to its original decision, prompting the defendant to appeal. The appellate court subsequently reversed the lower court's order, granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissing the common-law negligence cause of action. The court reasoned that the defendant successfully demonstrated a lack of sufficient control over the construction site, thereby owing no duty of care to the injured plaintiff, and the plaintiffs failed to present a triable issue of fact to counter this.

Personal InjuryCommon-Law NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewDuty of CareConstruction SiteSubcontractor LiabilityPremises LiabilityDutchess CountyNew York Law
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'Neil v. Roman Catholic Diocese

A student worker at St. Ephrem’s Church (the plaintiff) experienced sexual harassment from a visiting priest. After a particularly egregious incident, she informed other parish priests who promptly referred her to law enforcement. The plaintiff subsequently sued the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and St. Ephrem’s Church for sexual harassment, negligence, negligent hiring, and negligent supervision, arguing they should have known of the priest's propensity. The Supreme Court, Kings County, granted summary judgment to the Diocese defendants, dismissing the plaintiff's claims, finding they lacked actual or constructive knowledge. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding that the defendants met their burden in demonstrating no prior knowledge of the visiting priest's conduct and acted diligently once informed.

Sexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentNegligenceNegligent HiringNegligent SupervisionSummary JudgmentEmployer LiabilityConstructive KnowledgeDiscriminationNew York City Human Rights Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

MEMC Pasadena, Inc. v. Riddle Power, LLC

MEMC Pasadena, Inc. sued Triad Electric and Controls, Inc. and Riddle Power, LLC after an electrical accident caused a plant shutdown and loss of production. MEMC alleged breach of contract against Triad and negligence against both. A jury awarded MEMC $90,000 against Riddle but a take-nothing judgment for Triad. MEMC appealed, raising twenty-two issues challenging evidence sufficiency and jury charge. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence for the jury's conclusions regarding contract terms, agency, estoppel, and comparative negligence, and holding that MEMC's negligence claim against Triad was barred by the economic loss rule.

Electrical AccidentIndustrial Plant ShutdownLoss of ProductionBreach of ContractNegligenceEconomic Loss RuleAppellate ReviewJury TrialContractual Waiver of Consequential DamagesAgent Authority
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McFadden v. Lee

The plaintiff, a self-employed painter, suffered personal injuries after falling from a ladder while performing exterior painting for the defendants at their home. He filed an action alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and 241 (6). The Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, dismissing the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding that the defendants did not exercise supervisory control over the plaintiff's work, which is a prerequisite for liability under these specific statutes and common-law negligence when the injury stems from the work method rather than a dangerous premises condition.

Personal InjuryLadder FallLabor Law 200Common Law NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppellate DecisionHomeowner LiabilityIndependent ContractorSupervisory AuthoritySafe Place to Work
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 6,102 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