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. 03-22-00241-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 31, 2023

Texas Political Subdivisions Joint Self-Insurance Fund v. Texas Department of Insurance - Division of Workers' Compensation and Commissioner Cassie Brown in Her Official Capacity

The Texas Political Subdivisions Joint Self-Insurance Fund (TPS Fund) appealed the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction and summary-judgment motion by the 455th District Court of Travis County. The TPS Fund, a self-insured governmental entity, was assessed administrative penalties totaling $132,500 by the Texas Department of Insurance–Division of Workers’ Compensation for violations of the Texas Labor Code related to nonpayment or late payment of workers’ compensation benefits. The TPS Fund asserted governmental immunity from these penalties. The Court of Appeals reviewed the legislative history and prior common law, including Texas Workers’ Comp. Comm’n v. City of Eagle Pass, to determine if immunity was waived. It concluded that the 2019 amendment to Labor Code Section 504.053(e) merely codified existing law, which had already established a clear waiver of immunity for such regulatory actions against self-insured political subdivisions. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s order, holding that the TPS Fund’s governmental immunity is waived for the administrative penalties.

Workers' CompensationGovernmental ImmunityAdministrative PenaltiesTexas Labor CodeSelf-InsurancePolitical SubdivisionsStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewRegulatory AuthoritySovereign Immunity
References
13
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

Morales v. Ellen

This appeal concerns the application of the Texas Open Records Act (TORA) regarding the disclosure of investigative records pertaining to sexual harassment allegations against John Ellen, a former police lieutenant. The Attorney General challenged a trial court's decision that withheld the names and detailed statements of witnesses, citing privacy concerns, while ordering the release of Ellen's affidavit and the police board's findings. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, balancing the public's right to information about government affairs against the privacy rights of individuals involved in intimate and embarrassing sexual harassment investigations. It concluded that disclosing witness identities would discourage future reporting and cooperation, thereby upholding the privacy exemption under TORA.

Texas Open Records ActTORASexual HarassmentPrivacy RightsInvestigative RecordsGovernment TransparencyWitness ProtectionPublic OfficialsEctor CountyAppellate Law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Polite v. Casella

Plaintiff Roseann Polite filed a complaint in May 1995, alleging federal and state causes of action against Daniel Casella, Harvey Singer, Lynn Smith, Broome County Department of Social Services (DSS), and Broome County, stemming from the termination of her parental rights. Claims against Singer and Casella were previously dismissed. Defendants Smith, DSS, and Broome County moved to dismiss the remaining complaint in its entirety. The Court dismissed several counts based on federal statutes (FA-ACWA and Social Security Act) for lacking a private cause of action, and other counts for failing to state a claim against the specific defendants. However, the Court determined that the plaintiff adequately stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a Fourteenth Amendment due process violation against Smith, DSS, and Broome County. Consequently, the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety was denied, and the court retained jurisdiction over the plaintiff's state law claims.

Parental RightsDue ProcessFourteenth AmendmentSection 1983Motion to DismissSubject Matter JurisdictionFailure to State a ClaimDeliberate IndifferenceFoster CareChild Welfare
References
11
Case No. 13-17-00655-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2019

Texas Political Subdivisions Property/Casualty Joint Self Insurance Fund v. Pharr-San Juan-Alamo ISD

This case concerns an insurance-coverage dispute between an insurance fund (appellant) and an independent school district (appellee) regarding an automobile liability policy. The central issue is whether a golf cart involved in an accident is classified as a "covered auto" or "mobile equipment," which impacts the insurer's duties to defend and indemnify. The trial court initially ruled in favor of the school district, finding a breach of duty. However, the appellate court reversed and remanded the judgment, concluding that neither party had successfully met its summary judgment burden and identifying a material factual dispute concerning the golf cart's design.

Insurance coverageAutomobile liabilityGolf cart classificationDuty to defendDuty to indemnifySummary judgmentAppellate reviewContract interpretationTexas Transportation CodeDeclaratory judgment
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ben Bolt-Palito Blanco Consolidated Independent School District v. Texas Political Subdivisions Property/Casualty Joint Self-Insurance Fund

This case addresses an insurance coverage dispute between Ben Bolt-Palito Blanco Consolidated Independent School District (Ben Bolt) and the Texas Political Subdivisions Property/Casualty Joint Self-Insurance Fund (the Fund). Ben Bolt sued the Fund after a claim for extensive water and mold damage was denied, leading the Fund to assert governmental immunity. The Supreme Court of Texas determined that the Fund is a distinct governmental unit, thereby entitled to governmental immunity. However, the Court concluded that Section 271.152 of the Local Government Code provides a clear and unambiguous statutory waiver of the Fund’s immunity from suit for breach of contract claims in this context. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

Governmental ImmunityInsurance CoverageSelf-Insurance FundPolitical SubdivisionsInterlocal Cooperation ActBreach of ContractStatutory WaiverTrial Court JurisdictionDe Novo ReviewTexas Law
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Waffle House, Inc. v. Williams

Cathie Williams sued her employer, Waffle House, Inc., for sexual harassment under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) and negligent supervision/retention after enduring offensive comments and physical contact from a coworker, Eddie Davis. Despite Williams' complaints to management, the harassment continued, leading to her constructive discharge. A jury found in favor of Williams on both claims, awarding significant damages for the common-law claim. However, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment, ruling that the TCHRA's specific and tailored anti-harassment remedy is preemptive when negligence is entwined with harassment. The Court held that Williams' common-law claim was based on the same conduct as her TCHRA claim and that allowing it would undermine the Legislature's comprehensive statutory scheme. The case was remanded to the court of appeals to address the statutory sexual harassment issues.

Sexual HarassmentNegligent SupervisionNegligent RetentionPreemptionTCHRATexas Supreme CourtHostile Work EnvironmentConstructive DischargeJury VerdictCommon Law Tort
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Peck v. HUDSON CITY SCHOOL DIST., HUDSON, NY

The Court addressed defendant Hudson City School District's (HCSD) motion in limine regarding various evidentiary matters in a sexual harassment case brought by an employee against HCSD and a maintenance worker, John Walsh. The plaintiff alleged hostile work environment and quid pro quo harassment under Title VII. The Court denied HCSD's motions to exclude evidence of harassment prior to December 1, 1995, evidence of another employee's harassment, evidence related to Walsh's meeting with a student, and evidence concerning Walsh's resignation. The Court granted HCSD's motions to preclude the plaintiff from testifying about certain employee statements (unless within scope of authority) and to prevent introduction of evidence regarding HCSD's subsequent change in sexual harassment policy. The Court reserved decision on precluding Dr. Gilly's medical testimony pending further explanation from the plaintiff.

Motion in LimineSexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentTitle VIIContinuing Violation ExceptionEvidentiary RulingsFederal Rules of EvidenceFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureTreating Physician TestimonyHearsay
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General of United States

This case centers on an action brought by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and its youth arm, the Young Socialist Alliance (YSA), against the United States and various government officials. The plaintiffs alleged pervasive illegal activities by the FBI and other federal agencies, including systematic harassment, infiltration, disruption, and surveillance. The court found that the FBI engaged in unconstitutional disruption activities and surreptitious entries, and improperly used informants to gather private information on lawful political activities. As a result, the SWP and YSA were awarded $264,000 in damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act. However, claims for electronic surveillance damages and damages sought by individual plaintiffs were dismissed, and most requests for broad declaratory and injunctive relief were denied, except for an injunction ordering the segregation and limited dissemination of illegally obtained government documents.

FBI MisconductGovernment SurveillancePolitical OrganizationsFirst Amendment RightsCivil Rights LitigationFederal Tort Claims ActInfiltrationDisruption ProgramsSurreptitious EntriesInformants
References
141
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Perniciaro

The defendant appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Queens County, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the second degree and harassment after a nonjury trial. The appellate court modified the judgment, reversing the conviction of harassment and vacating the sentence imposed on it. The harassment count of the indictment was dismissed because the complainant failed to identify which of five individuals, including the defendant, made the threats, and the crime of harassment was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The judgment was affirmed as modified regarding the reckless endangerment conviction.

Appellate ReviewReckless EndangermentHarassmentCriminal ConvictionNonjury TrialJudgment ModificationEvidence InsufficiencyReasonable DoubtDismissal of ChargesNew York Law
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 888 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