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

Mohammed Haq v. State

Appellant Mohammed Haq was convicted of the state-jail-felony offense of credit card abuse. He appealed the trial court's decision, arguing that a receipt from an unauthorized credit-card transaction and two photo-arrays shown to witnesses were erroneously admitted. The court reviewed the admission of the receipt under the business-records exception to the hearsay rule, finding sufficient trustworthiness based on witness testimony. The court also examined the authentication of the photo-arrays, concluding that witness identification was sufficient. The appellate court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.

Credit Card AbuseEvidence AdmissibilityHearsayBusiness Records ExceptionPhoto-ArraysWitness IdentificationAuthentication of EvidenceAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionCriminal Procedure
References
25
Case No. 04-14-00256-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 04, 2015

Jeffrey Lee v. State

The appellant, Jeffrey Lee, appeals a judgment of conviction for aggravated robbery. The brief argues that the evidence presented by the State was legally insufficient to prove the appellant was the perpetrator, primarily due to the complainant's and co-worker's failure to identify him in court. Although fingerprints linked to the defendant were found and photo arrays were used, the brief contends that the connection between the photo identification and the in-court defendant was not sufficiently established, leading to an unreasonable inference by the jury. The appellant seeks to reverse the judgment and for a judgment of acquittal.

Aggravated RobberyInsufficient EvidenceIdentificationPhoto ArrayFingerprintsCriminal AppealTexas LawPerpetrator IdentityWitness Testimony
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 17, 1987

Pease v. Alford Photo Industries, Inc.

Mrs. Stephanye Pease filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Alford Photo Industries, Inc. and its president, Jimmy Alford, alleging unwelcomed sexual touching, culminating in a breast fondling incident on September 27, 1983. Pease claimed constructive discharge due to the hostile work environment and also asserted pendent state law claims including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and invasion of privacy. The court found that Mr. Alford engaged in a pattern of sexually harassing conduct towards Mrs. Pease and other female employees, establishing both quid pro quo sexual harassment and a hostile work environment. The court ruled that Mr. Alford's conduct was outrageous and violated both federal and state laws. Consequently, the court awarded Mrs. Pease judgment, including back pay, front pay, compensatory damages of $2,500.00, and punitive damages of $10,000.00.

sexual harassmenthostile work environmentquid pro quo harassmentconstructive dischargeassault and batteryintentional infliction of emotional distressinvasion of privacypunitive damagesTitle VIIemployee rights
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

North Jersey Media Group Inc. v. Fox News Network, LLC

New Jersey Media Group (NJMG) sued Fox News Network (Fox News) for copyright infringement of its "9/11 Photograph" in two consolidated actions (Photo Claims). Fox News counterclaimed against NJMG for copyright infringement and false endorsement regarding three video clips displayed on NJMG's website (Video Counterclaims). NJMG then filed a Third Party Complaint against Daily Caller, Inc. and News Distribution Network, Inc. (NDN) seeking indemnification for Fox News’ counterclaims (Indemnification Claims). Third Party Defendants, joined by NJMG, moved to sever the Video Counterclaims and Indemnification Claims from the Photo Claims. The Court granted the motion to sever, finding that the claims did not arise from the same transaction or occurrence, presented different questions of fact, had minimal overlap in witnesses and documentary proof, and while settlement was not necessarily facilitated, judicial economy and avoidance of prejudice favored severance.

Copyright InfringementSeverance of ClaimsFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 21Judicial EconomyPrejudiceLanham ActIndemnification ClaimsThird-Party ComplaintConsolidated ActionsFair Use Defense
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Executive Photo, Inc. v. Norrell

This case involves an action for conversion of property and violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Defendant Rene Norrell moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege "continuity" for the RICO claim. The Court noted that in a previous order, it had granted dismissal of the RICO claim but allowed repleading. The amended complaint now details "repeated and numerous" predicate acts occurring over at least two and a half years, which the Court found sufficient to establish closed-ended continuity. Consequently, the defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was denied.

RICO ActRacketeeringConversion of PropertyMotion to DismissRule 12(b)(6)Pleading StandardsContinuity RequirementPredicate ActsClosed-ended ContinuityAmended Complaint
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

White v. Fuji Photo Film USA, Inc.

Tobi White, an administrative secretary at Fuji, filed a race discrimination and hostile work environment action against Fuji. She alleged that her supervisor, Ms. Schaffer, created a hostile environment through her tone, yelling, and exclusion from meetings and recognition. White also claimed pay disparity. The court, presided over by Judge McMahon, considered Fuji's motion for summary judgment. The court found that White did not suffer an adverse employment action, that Fuji articulated legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for its actions, and that White failed to establish a prima facie case for pay disparity or hostile work environment based on race. Consequently, the motion for summary judgment was granted, and the complaint was dismissed.

DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentSummary JudgmentRace DiscriminationAdverse Employment ActionPerformance Improvement PlanProbationPay DisparityTitle VIIMcDonnell Douglas Test
References
33
Case No. 05 Civ. 7869
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 14, 2009

Fuji Photo Film U.S.A., Inc. v. McNulty

FUJIFILM U.S.A. (Fuji) initiated an action alleging mail and wire fraud, commercial bribery, common law fraud, conspiracy to defraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against Scott F. McNulty, Frank Franze, and The Windwood Group LLC (Windwood Defendants). McNulty asserted a counterclaim against Fuji alleging defamation, while the Windwood Defendants asserted counterclaims for breach of contract and fraud. Fuji subsequently moved to dismiss all three counterclaims. The court granted Fuji's motions, dismissing McNulty's defamation counterclaim because the statements fell under Section 74 privilege or common interest privilege, and finding the Windwood Defendants' claims for breach of contract and fraud insufficiently pleaded. However, the court also granted McNulty and the Windwood Defendants leave to amend their respective counterclaims.

DefamationBreach of ContractFraudCounterclaimsMotion to DismissPleading StandardsNew York Civil Rights Law Section 74Common Interest PrivilegeRacketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)Leave to Amend
References
59
Case No. ADJ6467730
Regular
May 14, 2019

SAMUEL JACKSON vs. BAY PHOTO LAB, MID CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves Samuel Jackson claiming permanent and total disability due to a work injury to his back, psyche, and other body parts, which his employer's insurer, Mid Century Insurance Company, contested. After the Administrative Law Judge initially awarded permanent total disability, the insurer petitioned for reconsideration. The parties subsequently submitted a Compromise and Release agreement for $657,813.60, which the Appeals Board has approved. The Board rescinded the prior award and approved the settlement, finding it adequate and in the applicant's best interest.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCompromise and ReleasePermanent Total DisabilityFindings Award and OrderLabor Code Section 5001WCAB Rule 10882Labor Code Section 5002Medicare Set AsideAnnuity
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 1949

United States v. Foster

Defendants indicted for conspiracy to overthrow the government challenged the jury selection process in the Southern District of New York. They alleged systematic exclusion of the poor, minorities, women, and political affiliates, arguing that property qualifications and low juror fees were unconstitutional. Judge Medina conducted a six-week trial, reviewing extensive evidence from 1940-1949 jury records and witness testimonies. The court found no deliberate, willful, or systematic discrimination, concluding that the defendants failed to meet their burden of proof. The judge overruled the challenge and denied all motions, emphasizing the broad discretion in jury selection and rejecting the concept of proportional representation for jury lists.

Jury selection challengeSystematic exclusionJury discriminationEconomic statusRacial minoritiesWomen's rightsPolitical affiliationGrand jury panelPetit jury venireConstitutional challenge
References
6
Case No. ADJ117564
Regular
Oct 05, 2012

Catrina Williams vs. Diversified Photo\/Supply, CIGA by its Servicing Facility CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED, on behalf of FREMONT INSURANCE, in liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's finding of industrial injury to the applicant's neck and bilateral upper extremities, resulting in 55.75% permanent disability. Applicant's contentions regarding apportionment of neck disability to non-industrial causes, injury to shoulders, internal systems, and psychiatric injury were largely rejected based on lack of substantial medical evidence and credibility issues. The case was remanded for further proceedings solely to address a lien claim for attorney fees filed by the applicant's prior attorney, George Slotnick.

CIGAFremont Insuranceliquidiationreconsiderationcumulative traumabilateral upper extremitiesneck injuryapportionmentnon-industrial causesAgreed Medical Examiner
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 34 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