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
Apr 17, 1995

Stevens v. Spec, Inc.

This case involves cross-appeals from an order in Tompkins County regarding an altercation at a nightclub where the plaintiff was struck by defendant John Ryan. The plaintiff sued Spec, Inc. (nightclub owner), Douglas Layaw (Spec's president), and John Ryan for assault, negligence (premises liability), and Dram Shop Act violations. The Supreme Court dismissed the assault claim but allowed the negligence and Dram Shop claims to proceed. On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal of the assault claim, ruling Ryan was an independent contractor. Furthermore, it reversed the lower court's decision on the negligence and Dram Shop claims, finding the assault was unforeseeable and no commercial alcohol sale occurred, thus granting summary judgment to the defendants on all counts.

Independent ContractorPremises LiabilityDram Shop ActSummary JudgmentAssault and BatteryNightclub LiabilityAppellate ReviewScope of EmploymentIntoxicationForeseeability
References
13
Case No. 13-09-00067-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 2013

CITY OF McALLEN, TEXAS v. Arnaldo Ramirez Jr., Raul Romero, Promotions of America, Inc., Nolana Entertainment, Inc.

The City of McAllen appealed a trial court judgment that found its denial of a conditional use permit for the Collage nightclub constituted an unconstitutional taking under the Texas Constitution. Appellees Arnaldo Ramirez Jr., Raul Romero, Promotions of America, Inc., and Nolana Entertainment, Inc., had sued after the permit denial led to the nightclub's closure and significant financial losses. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that the City's actions demonstrated a severe economic impact and interfered with the appellees' reasonable investment-backed expectations, thus satisfying the criteria for a regulatory taking. The court also upheld the awards for lost investments, lost profits, and the loss of collateralized property (La Villa Real) and its associated rental income.

Regulatory TakingProperty RightsConditional Use PermitZoning OrdinanceTexas Constitution Article I Section 17Economic ImpactInvestment-Backed ExpectationsDue ProcessDamages AwardLost Profits
References
93
Case No. ADJ11795460
Regular
Oct 17, 2019

GABRIEL MORA vs. SB ENTERTAINMENT VENTURES INC. dba 340 RESTAURANT AND NIGHTCLUB, EMPLOYERS PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a workers' compensation claim where the applicant alleges injury during an altercation at work. The employer, SB Entertainment Ventures Inc., denied the claim, asserting the applicant was the initial aggressor. The applicant sought a video of the incident, which the employer failed to produce despite a subpoena and court order. The WCJ issued a finding that the video showed the applicant was not the initial aggressor, implying the employer's non-production led to this conclusion. The Appeals Board treated the employer's petition as a request for reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's finding, and remanded the case. This action was taken because the prior hearing lacked sufficient admitted evidence to support the finding, and due process requires a proper evidentiary record before determining such a threshold issue as initial aggressor status.

WCABRemoval PetitionReconsiderationInitial AggressorDue ProcessSubpoena Duces TecumAdverse InferenceWillful SuppressionBad Faith ActionsSanctions
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 01, 1994

Triplex Communications, Inc. v. Riley

Officers James Riley and Mary Gray, injured by an intoxicated driver, sued Triplex Communications, Inc., a radio station promoting a nightclub where the driver was overserved. They alleged joint enterprise, civil conspiracy, and negligent promotion. The trial court did not find the radio station liable, but the court of appeals reversed, allowing these claims. The Supreme Court of Texas reversed the court of appeals' judgment, holding that the radio station could not be held liable under any of the three theories. The Court found insufficient evidence for joint enterprise, an incorrect definition of civil conspiracy requiring specific intent, and no legal duty for negligent promotion under the circumstances, thereby ordering that the plaintiffs take nothing from the radio station.

Joint EnterpriseCivil ConspiracyNegligent PromotionDram Shop ActTexas Alcoholic Beverage CodeTort LawLiabilityRadio Station LiabilityNightclub LiabilityIntoxicated Driver
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 1997

Luthi v. Long Island Resource Corp.

The plaintiff, a manager and maintenance worker, suffered personal injuries after falling from a ladder while running a microphone cable through a drop ceiling at a nightclub. He sued the premises owner, alleging violations of Labor Law § 240 (1) and § 241 (6). The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dismissed these claims, ruling that the plaintiff was not performing "alteration" work as defined by Labor Law § 240 (1) because laying a temporary, unattached cable was not a "significant physical change" to the building. The court also dismissed the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim as the accident did not occur in a "construction" context. This appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that the plaintiff's activity did not fall within the protective scope of the cited Labor Law provisions.

Personal InjuryLabor LawWorkplace AccidentLadder FallAlteration WorkConstruction WorkSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationEmployer Liability
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cummins v. Brodie

Wade Cummins, an Elvis impersonator, sued Steve Brodie and Elvis Wade International, Inc. for breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, and violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. Cummins alleged that Brodie, an entrepreneur who sought to promote Cummins' career, advised him to cancel several nightclub performance dates with promises of better bookings, but failed to secure replacements. The Trial Court found that an implied contract existed, Brodie took control of Cummins' bookings, and Cummins suffered damages from cancelled engagements. The Trial Court awarded Cummins $75,000 plus costs, finding Brodie liable for breach of contract due to his failure to obtain replacement bookings. On appeal, the court affirmed the Trial Court's findings of liability and the award of damages, rejecting Brodie's arguments regarding insufficient evidence and failure to mitigate damages.

Breach of ContractImplied ContractFraudulent MisrepresentationTennessee Consumer Protection ActDamage MitigationLost ProfitsEntertainer ContractBooking Agent LiabilityAppellate ReviewTrial Court Findings
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2017

Antic v. City of New York

Pero Antic, a former NBA player, filed a civil rights suit against the City of New York and NYPD officers following his arrest in 2015 outside a nightclub. Antic alleged false arrest, malicious prosecution, and excessive force after being arrested for obstruction of governmental administration (OGA), disorderly conduct, and menacing, stemming from an incident where he approached an officer during his teammate Thabo Sefolosha's arrest. The Court granted the Defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding that the officers had arguable probable cause for Antic's arrest for OGA, thereby entitling them to qualified immunity on the false arrest claim. Antic's malicious prosecution claims were dismissed because the charges were dismissed in the interests of justice, which did not indicate his innocence but rather an act of mercy due to mitigating circumstances. His excessive force and assault and battery claims also failed as the force used (a push resulting in no injury) was deemed de minimis and objectively reasonable given the chaotic situation. Finally, claims against the City of New York for Monell liability and negligence were dismissed due to lack of an underlying constitutional violation, failure to allege municipal policy, or abandonment.

Civil RightsFalse ArrestMalicious ProsecutionExcessive ForceSummary JudgmentQualified ImmunityObstruction of Governmental AdministrationPolice MisconductNYPDFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56
References
55
Showing 1-7 of 7 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