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 09, 1997

Claim of Seaman v. County of Onondaga

The Workers' Compensation Board's decision, filed April 9, 1997, ruled that a volunteer firefighter in the Town of Spafford, Onondaga County, sustained a compensable injury and awarded benefits under the Volunteer Firefighters’ Benefit Law. The claimant suffered a permanent disability to his left wrist after a slip and fall on ice. Despite the County of Onondaga's assertions, the Board found, with substantial evidence, that the claimant experienced a 78% loss of earning capacity. This disability prevented him from returning to his prior employment as a heavy equipment operator, prompting his doctor to recommend job retraining. The court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that it was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationVolunteer Firefighters' Benefit LawPermanent DisabilityEarning CapacitySlip and FallWork InjuryOnondaga CountyAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceJob Retraining

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 09, 2001

Aherin v. County of Onondaga

In December 1995, the claimant's spouse, an employee of the Onondaga County Highway Department, suffered a back injury. In January 1998, he committed suicide. The claimant sought workers' compensation death benefits, alleging a causal link between the work injury and the suicide. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded benefits, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, finding no causal connection. The claimant appealed, relying on a psychiatrist's report. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the psychiatrist's opinion was based on speculation rather than sufficient medical evidence in the record.

SuicideCausationDeath BenefitsWorkers' Compensation BoardMedical OpinionPsychiatric EvaluationMental IllnessAppellate ReviewEvidentiary StandardSpeculative Evidence

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jun 11, 1996

Claim of Morrell v. Onondaga County

The case involves an appeal from Workers' Compensation Board decisions concerning a claimant's condition caused by prior work exposure. In 1988, while working for Onondaga County Department of Social Services, the claimant was exposed to formaldehyde gas from new desks, leading to chronic respiratory symptoms and formaldehyde poisoning. In 1990, she was diagnosed with multiple myeloma and sought to reopen her workers' compensation case, asserting a causal link. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and subsequently the Board found a causal relationship between the formaldehyde exposure and multiple myeloma. The self-insured employer appealed, arguing insufficient evidence, but the Board's decision, supported by expert medical testimony, was affirmed.

Formaldehyde ExposureMultiple MyelomaCausal RelationshipWorkers' Compensation BenefitsOccupational DiseaseToxic ExposureCancer CausationMedical Expert TestimonyAppellate ReviewBoard Discretion

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Rigle v. County of Onondaga

This case involves an appeal where the judgment granting summary judgment to the defendants was unanimously affirmed. Petitioners David Rigle and William R. Sawyer had initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding and plenary actions against the County of Onondaga, James R. Miller, and Nicholas J. Pirro, alleging retaliatory discharge in violation of Civil Service Law § 75-b and 42 USC § 1983. The Supreme Court dismissed their claims. The appellate court upheld the dismissal, citing the plaintiffs' failure to file a notice of claim for the Civil Service Law claims and the defendants' independent basis for Rigle's discharge. Furthermore, the 42 USC § 1983 claims concerning First Amendment free speech were dismissed because the plaintiffs' comments, despite public concern, were deemed disruptive to the workplace, and defendants had non-retaliatory reasons for termination. The individual defendants were also granted qualified immunity.

Retaliatory DischargeFirst AmendmentFree SpeechPublic EmployeesQualified ImmunitySummary JudgmentCivil Service Law42 USC 1983Whistleblower ProtectionOnondaga County

References

Case No. 06-22-00022-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 16, 2022

Cynthia Martin v. Hopkins County, Hopkins County Judge Robert Newsom, Hopkins County Commissioner Mickey Barker, Hopkins County Commissioner Greg Anglin, Hopkins County Commissioner Wade Bartley, and Hopkins County Commissioner Joe Price

Cynthia Martin raised ultra vires claims against Hopkins County officials regarding an agreement with a private company to build a solar power plant. Martin contended the agreement was a tax abatement under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 381, Section 381.004(g), which she argued did not comply with the Texas Tax Code provisions. The County and officials asserted the agreement was a grant of public money under Section 381.004(h), thus not governed by the Texas Tax Code. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the County. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the agreement was for a grant of public funds, not a tax abatement, because the developer was obligated to pay all ad valorem taxes, and the payments from the county were program grants calculated with reference to those paid taxes, not a reduction or nullification of the tax liability itself.

Ultra Vires ClaimsEconomic Development AgreementTax AbatementPublic Funds GrantTexas Local Government Code Chapter 381Texas Tax Code Chapter 312Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewContract ConstructionStatutory Construction

References

Case No. 13-14-00293-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Feb 26, 2015

San Patricio County, Texas v. Nueces County, Texas and Nueces County Appraisal District

This is a reply brief filed by San Patricio County, Texas, in an appeal against Nueces County and Nueces County Appraisal District. The core issue revolves around unresolved boundary disputes between the two counties, leading to double taxation for industrial taxpayers like Occidental Petroleum Company. San Patricio County argues that the Nueces County District Court lacked jurisdiction and venue, and erred in granting summary judgment without determining the boundary line. They assert that the 2003 Judgment, which declared 'natural and artificial modifications to the shoreline of San Patricio County shall form a part of San Patricio County,' includes docks, piers, and similar facilities as part of their county, consistent with maritime law and riparian rights. The county seeks reversal of the trial court's decision, either for transfer back to a neutral Refugio County District Court, or for a judgment declaring the disputed properties within San Patricio County's jurisdiction, or for a remand to resolve factual issues concerning the boundary.

County Boundary DisputeJurisdictionVenueSummary JudgmentCollateral Attack2003 Judgment InterpretationShoreline ModificationsDocks and PiersRiparian RightsTaxation Dispute

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency

This memorandum-decision and order addresses defendants' motion for summary judgment in an employment discrimination case. Plaintiff, an African-American, alleged racial discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation by the Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency (OCRRA) and individual defendants under Title VII, NYSHRL, and §§ 1981a, 1983. The court granted summary judgment for defendants, dismissing NYSHRL claims due to the election of remedies doctrine. Title VII claims against individual defendants were deemed redundant or untimely. The court found plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for discrimination or retaliation, or to show pretext. Hostile work environment claims were dismissed for lack of exhaustion and insufficient evidence. Conspiracy and New York Public Authorities Law claims were also dismissed, leading to the closure of the case.

Employment DiscriminationRace DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentSummary JudgmentTitle VIINew York State Human Rights Law42 U.S.C. Section 198142 U.S.C. Section 1983Intracorporate Conspiracy Doctrine

References

Case No. No. 08-22-00029-CV (TC# 2021DCV1132)

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 27, 2023

Ricardo A. Samaniego, in His Official Capacity as County Judge, Carlos Leon, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, David Stout, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Illiana Holguin, in Her Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Carl L. Robinson, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner v. Associated General Contractors of Texas, Highway, Heavy, Utilities & Industrial Branch and a Brothers Milling, LLC

The El Paso County Commissioners Court, including County Judge Ricardo A. Samaniego and Commissioners, appealed the denial of their plea to the jurisdiction. They were sued by Associated General Contractors of Texas and A Brothers Milling, LLC, who alleged the Commissioners Court acted ultra vires in setting prevailing wage rates for heavy-highway construction projects in El Paso County. The Appellants argued governmental immunity shielded them and that their wage determinations were final. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, concluding that the Appellees had sufficiently pleaded an ultra vires claim, which falls within the trial court's subject-matter jurisdiction. The court clarified that ultra vires acts by public officials are not considered acts of the state and therefore are not subject to the finality clause.

Governmental ImmunityUltra Vires ActPrevailing Wage RatePublic WorksSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Government CodeStatutory InterpretationEl Paso County

References

Case No. 13-05-075-CV, 13-05-022-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 07, 2005

San Patricio County v. Nueces County

This case involves appeals between San Patricio County and Nueces County concerning a boundary dispute, a tax suit, and a bill of review. San Patricio County initially sought a declaratory judgment to establish the boundary and an accounting for ad valorem taxes. The trial court's 2003 boundary judgment was affirmed. However, Nueces County filed a bill of review to challenge the boundary judgment due to alleged lack of notice, which the appellate court reversed and rendered in favor of San Patricio County. Separately, the trial court dismissed San Patricio's tax suit against Nueces on governmental immunity grounds, which the appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that immunity did not apply to unauthorized tax collections.

Boundary DisputeTax LitigationBill of ReviewGovernmental ImmunitySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewDeclaratory JudgmentCounty GovernmentJurisdictional IssueTexas Law

References

Case No. 04-13-00080-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 17, 2013

Nelson Wolff, County Judge of Bexar County Texas, Bexar County Commissioners Paul Elizondo, Tommy Adkisson, Sergio Chico Rodriguez and Kevin Wolff And Bexar County, Texas v. Deputy Constables Association of Bexar

The Deputy Constables Association of Bexar County sued Nelson Wolff, et al., alleging a violation of the Fire and Police Employee Relations Act for failing to engage in collective bargaining. The case originated from the trial court's denial of Wolff's plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss. The central legal question on appeal was whether the Deputy Constables possessed the standing to collectively bargain under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 174, which restricts this right to "police officers" employed in a political subdivision's "police department." The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, analyzed relevant statutory definitions and precedent, distinguishing between the Sheriff's Office (considered a "police department" for the county) and the Constable's Office. Concluding that Deputy Constables are not employed by the "police department" or the Sheriff's Office, the court determined they do not meet the statutory definition of "police officer" and thus lack standing to pursue their claim. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision and rendered judgment in favor of Wolff, dismissing the suit.

Collective BargainingStandingPolice OfficersLocal Government CodeBexar CountyConstable's OfficeSheriff's OfficeStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewPlea to Jurisdiction

References

Showing 1-10 of 6,619 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

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 09, 1997

Claim of Seaman v. County of Onondaga

Workers' CompensationVolunteer Firefighters' Benefit LawPermanent DisabilityEarning CapacitySlip and FallWork InjuryOnondaga CountyAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceJob Retraining

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 09, 2001

Aherin v. County of Onondaga

SuicideCausationDeath BenefitsWorkers' Compensation BoardMedical OpinionPsychiatric EvaluationMental IllnessAppellate ReviewEvidentiary StandardSpeculative Evidence

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jun 11, 1996

Claim of Morrell v. Onondaga County

Formaldehyde ExposureMultiple MyelomaCausal RelationshipWorkers' Compensation BenefitsOccupational DiseaseToxic ExposureCancer CausationMedical Expert TestimonyAppellate ReviewBoard Discretion

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Rigle v. County of Onondaga

Retaliatory DischargeFirst AmendmentFree SpeechPublic EmployeesQualified ImmunitySummary JudgmentCivil Service Law42 USC 1983Whistleblower ProtectionOnondaga County

References

Case No. 06-22-00022-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 16, 2022

Cynthia Martin v. Hopkins County, Hopkins County Judge Robert Newsom, Hopkins County Commissioner Mickey Barker, Hopkins County Commissioner Greg Anglin, Hopkins County Commissioner Wade Bartley, and Hopkins County Commissioner Joe Price

References

Case No. 13-14-00293-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Feb 26, 2015

San Patricio County, Texas v. Nueces County, Texas and Nueces County Appraisal District

County Boundary DisputeJurisdictionVenueSummary JudgmentCollateral Attack2003 Judgment InterpretationShoreline ModificationsDocks and PiersRiparian RightsTaxation Dispute

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency

References

Case No. No. 08-22-00029-CV (TC# 2021DCV1132)

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 27, 2023

Ricardo A. Samaniego, in His Official Capacity as County Judge, Carlos Leon, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, David Stout, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Illiana Holguin, in Her Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Carl L. Robinson, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner v. Associated General Contractors of Texas, Highway, Heavy, Utilities & Industrial Branch and a Brothers Milling, LLC

Governmental ImmunityUltra Vires ActPrevailing Wage RatePublic WorksSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Government CodeStatutory InterpretationEl Paso County

References

Case No. 13-05-075-CV, 13-05-022-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 07, 2005

San Patricio County v. Nueces County

Boundary DisputeTax LitigationBill of ReviewGovernmental ImmunitySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewDeclaratory JudgmentCounty GovernmentJurisdictional IssueTexas Law

References

Case No. 04-13-00080-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 17, 2013

Nelson Wolff, County Judge of Bexar County Texas, Bexar County Commissioners Paul Elizondo, Tommy Adkisson, Sergio Chico Rodriguez and Kevin Wolff And Bexar County, Texas v. Deputy Constables Association of Bexar

Collective BargainingStandingPolice OfficersLocal Government CodeBexar CountyConstable's OfficeSheriff's OfficeStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewPlea to Jurisdiction

References

Showing 1-10 of 6,619 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.