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. 2016 NY Slip Op 07198 [144 AD3d 691]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 02, 2016

Matter of Sellers v. Stanford

Khaliyq Sellers, convicted of first-degree assault, had his parole revoked by the New York State Board of Parole after violating release conditions at a drug treatment center and during detention at Rikers Island. The violations included making verbal threats to "blow up the place" and threatening to kill everyone at Rikers Island, among other non-compliant behaviors. Sellers initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding, challenging the revocation on grounds of untimeliness and due process violations, which was transferred to the Appellate Division. The Appellate Division, Second Department, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding on the merits, concluding that the Board's determination was supported by substantial evidence. The court specifically found that verbal threats constituted prohibited behavior under parole rule 8, without requiring physical conduct, and that the final parole revocation hearing was timely held.

Parole RevocationCPLR Article 78 ProceedingSubstantial Evidence ReviewDue Process RightsParole ViolationsVerbal ThreatsTimeliness of HearingAppellate DivisionAssault ConvictionCorrectional Facility Incident
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Castellow v. Swiftex Manufacturing Corp.

Helen F. Castellow sued her employer, Swiftex Manufacturing Corporation, for negligence after suffering work-related injuries. Swiftex, a non-subscriber to workers' compensation insurance, offered a private benefit plan that required employees to waive common-law negligence claims. Castellow enrolled in the plan, signed the waiver, and received benefits. However, she subsequently filed a negligence lawsuit against Swiftex, which was met with a motion for summary judgment from Swiftex based on waiver, ratification, and estoppel. Castellow appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment, contending the waiver violated public policy by undermining the legislative intent of the workers' compensation scheme. The appellate court agreed, finding Swiftex's private plan offered fewer benefits and greater employer immunity than mandated by the Workers' Compensation Act, thus rendering the waiver unenforceable. The court reversed the trial court's summary judgment.

Workers' CompensationWaiver EnforceabilityPublic PolicyEmployer NegligenceNon-subscriber EmployerPrivate Benefit PlanSummary Judgment AppealTexas Labor CodeOpen Courts DoctrineCommon Law Remedies
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jaske v. Murray Ohio Manufacturing Co.

Karen E. Jaske, a production worker, developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome due to her employment with Murray Ohio Manufacturing Company, Inc., requiring multiple surgeries. Despite these interventions, she continues to experience chronic pain and functional limitations. Medical experts provided varying assessments of her permanent partial disability, ranging from 5% to 10% for each hand, while a vocational expert estimated a 62% industrial disability. The chancellor ultimately determined a 20% permanent partial disability for both hands, resulting in an award of 80 weeks of compensation. Jaske appealed, contending that the chancellor improperly weighed her subsequent, more lucrative employment in an insurance sales role. The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's decision, asserting that considering subsequent employment is a legitimate non-medical factor in evaluating the extent of an employee's permanent disability.

Carpal Tunnel SyndromePermanent Partial DisabilityVocational Expert TestimonyMedical Expert TestimonyIndustrial DisabilitySubsequent EmploymentEarning CapacityAMA Guides to Evaluation of Permanent ImpairmentAppellate ReviewMaterial Evidence Rule
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Conkle v. Builders Concrete Products Manufacturing Co.

The parents of Douglas Conkle sued his employer, Builders Concrete Products Manufacturing Company, and the manufacturer of a concrete batch plant, Dillon Steel, for damages resulting from his death. The trial court granted summary judgment for the employer, citing the Worker's Compensation Act, and for the manufacturer, based on a 10-year statute of limitations for improvements to real property. The court of appeals affirmed. This court affirmed the summary judgment for the employer but reversed the summary judgment for Dillon Steel, finding a factual issue regarding whether the machinery was an 'improvement to real property' under TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE § 16.009, or merely component parts, thus remanding the case for further proceedings concerning the manufacturer.

Texas LawSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ActWrongful DeathStatute of LimitationsImprovement to Real PropertyComponent PartsEmployer LiabilityManufacturer LiabilityAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co.

Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company (MHT), a stock transfer agent, sued Smith Barney, Robert Serio, and Tucker Anthony for losses sustained due to an employee's stock certificate embezzlement. MHT alleged violations of federal securities laws (Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5) and various common law claims. The District Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, ruling that MHT lacked standing as neither a purchaser nor seller of securities, and the alleged fraud was not "in connection with" the purchase or sale of securities. Consequently, the court dismissed the federal claims with prejudice and the remaining state law claims without prejudice due to lack of federal jurisdiction.

Federal Securities LawRule 10b-5Exchange Act Section 10(b)StandingPurchaser-Seller RuleIn Connection With RequirementEmbezzlementStock Transfer AgentBrokerage AccountsConversion
References
24
Case No. E2002-00093-COA-R9-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 2002

Billy Allan Braswell, et ux v. AC and S, Inc.

In this products liability action, the plaintiffs (Billy Allan Braswell, Nannie Mae Bunton, and Henry L. Bales) sued a manufacturer for injuries due to asbestos exposure. After the manufacturer was declared insolvent, the plaintiffs amended their complaint to add National Service Industries, Inc., the seller of the product, more than one year after the injury. The Trial Court allowed this amendment and denied the seller's motion for summary judgment, which was based on the statute of limitations defense. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Trial Court's decision, concluding that the statute of limitations against the seller began to run when the manufacturer was adjudicated bankrupt, in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-28-106(b), which allows an action against a seller if the manufacturer is insolvent.

Products LiabilityAsbestos ExposureStatute of LimitationsManufacturer InsolvencySeller LiabilityStrict Liability in TortSummary Judgment DenialTennessee LawAppellate ReviewAccrual of Cause of Action
References
8
Case No. 13-10-00439-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2012

El Paso Production Oil & Gas USA L. P. N/K/A El Paso E&P Company, L. P. v. Kenneth Sellers

This appeal concerns a title dispute over a mineral estate in Hidalgo County, Texas. Appellant El Paso Production Oil & Gas USA, L.P. challenged the trial court's grant of partial summary judgment to Appellee Kenneth Sellers. Sellers claimed vested record title to mineral interests in Lots 9 and 12, seeking an accounting of oil and gas proceeds. El Paso contended that Sellers's chain of title was broken by competing claims and prior conveyances. The appellate court found that neither party definitively proved or disproved superior title, indicating genuine issues of material fact remained. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Title disputeMineral rightsOil and gas lawSummary judgment reviewAppellate procedureTexas property lawReal estate titleChain of titleHidalgo CountyReversal
References
14
Case No. M1999-00021-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 10, 2000

Fahrner v. SW Manufacturing

This case involves an appeal by SW Manufacturing, Inc. against the trial court's denial of their motion for judgment on the pleadings in an employment discrimination and retaliatory discharge case brought by Andrew Fahrner. Fahrner argued that the discovery rule should extend to his claims, as he only became aware of the alleged retaliatory motive for his termination in March 1998, despite being discharged in November 1997. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee, in Nashville, reviewed the case de novo and found no legal basis to extend the discovery rule to retaliatory discharge and discrimination claims. The court concluded that the one-year statute of limitations began when Fahrner received unequivocal notice of his termination in November 1997, and his complaint, filed in December 1998, was therefore untimely. The Court reversed the trial court's decision, granting SW Manufacturing's motion for judgment on the pleadings.

Retaliatory DischargeEmployment DiscriminationStatute of LimitationsDiscovery RuleMotion for Judgment on PleadingsAppellate ReviewAccrual of Cause of ActionUnequivocal Notice of TerminationTennessee Court of AppealsTort Law
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Laniok v. Advisory Committee of the Brainerd Manufacturing Co. Pension Plan

Plaintiff Peter Laniok sued his former employer, Brainerd Manufacturing Company, under ERISA for denying him pension benefits. Laniok argued the waiver he signed, which foreclosed his participation in the company's pension plan due to his age, was void against public policy and violated ERISA's age discrimination provisions and the ADEA. The defendant moved for summary judgment, asserting the waiver was valid. The court determined that ERISA does not prohibit an employee from knowingly and voluntarily waiving pension rights and found no violation of ERISA's age discrimination provision or ADEA. Consequently, the court granted summary judgment in favor of Brainerd Manufacturing Company.

ERISAPension BenefitsWaiverAge DiscriminationADEASummary JudgmentEmployee RightsRetirement PlanDefined Benefit PlanPublic Policy
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 1969

Hedges Manufacturing Co. v. Worley

Curtis A. Davis, with a pre-existing 70% disability, sustained a new injury in August 1967 while employed by Hedges Manufacturing Co. The trial court found Davis 30% permanently partially disabled from the 1967 injury and 100% permanently and totally disabled from the combined injuries, awarding benefits against Hedges/Aetna and the Second Injury Fund. The initial judgment was set aside and amended due to incorrect computation of liability and credits for temporary total disability payments. The amended judgment awarded Davis $5,040.00 from Hedges Manufacturing Co. and Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. and $8,818.00 from the Second Injury Fund. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's amended judgment, overruling assignments of error regarding credit for temporary total disability payments and computation method.

Workers' CompensationSecond Injury FundPermanent Partial DisabilityPermanent Total DisabilityDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationEmployer LiabilityInsurer LiabilityPre-existing Condition
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 4,306 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