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

In Re Horkins

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court addressed West End Terrace, Inc.'s (WETI) motion for summary judgment regarding a debtor in possession's objection to WETI's claim. The court granted summary judgment for WETI, ruling that the debtor's claims of fraud in condominium sales were barred by res judicata due to prior state court judgments. Additionally, the court rejected claims of irregularities in foreclosure sales, citing insufficient evidence from the debtor and non-compliance with discovery rules. Later, the court denied the debtor's motion to alter or amend the summary judgment, reiterating its prior findings and emphasizing the debtor's failure to meet Rule 56(f) requirements for further discovery.

BankruptcySummary JudgmentRes JudicataForeclosure SalesAutomatic Stay ViolationDebtor in PossessionClaim ObjectionFraud AllegationsCondominium SalesFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f)
References
50
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sutherland v. City of New York

Norrel Sutherland, a dock builder, was injured on a job site while operating a defective winch motor for Pile Foundation Construction Co., Inc., his employer. He subsequently filed actions against the City of New York, its departments, Ingersoll-Rand Company, and Pile Foundation, alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law, Jones Act, and LHWCA. The Supreme Court initially dismissed claims against Pile under LHWCA and Jones Act, and some Labor Law claims against the City, but denied dismissing the Labor Law § 200 claim against the City. Upon reargument, the court adhered to its prior determinations. Sutherland and the City appealed. This appellate court dismisses several appeals and cross-appeals, upholds the dismissal of Jones Act and Labor Law §§ 240 and 241 (6) claims, and modifies the prior order to grant summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 claim against the City. The court extensively discusses the "dual capacity" employer liability under LHWCA, affirming that Pile's alleged negligence related to employer functions, not vessel owner functions, thus granting Pile immunity. The final decision is to modify and affirm the prior orders.

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation ActJones Act ClaimsLabor Law ClaimsDual Capacity DoctrineVessel Owner NegligenceEmployer ImmunitySummary Judgment AppealConstruction Site SafetyDefective EquipmentMaritime Worker Injury
References
20
Case No. 06-10-00099-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 03, 2011

Curtis Leo Williams v. State

Curtis Leo Williams appealed his conviction for possession of marihuana, a state jail felony. The State alleged two prior felony convictions, which elevated the punishment range to a second-degree felony. In a related case, Williams also appealed a conviction for cocaine possession. The court addressed common issues in its opinion for cause number 06-10-00098-CR. Finding no error, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment in this case.

Criminal AppealControlled SubstanceMarihuana PossessionFelony ConvictionPrior ConvictionsPunishment EnhancementAppellate ReviewTrial Court JudgmentTexas Court of AppealsPro Se Appeal
References
2
Case No. ADJ3720830 (BAK 0149252) ADJ2840667 (BAK 0149530)
Regular
Jun 15, 2010

LINDA LOPEZ vs. MY TRANSPORTATION; BROADSPIRE/CRAWFORD & COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that the Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) prior opinion was not substantial evidence due to incomplete information regarding the applicant's medical history and intervening events. The defendant's petition argued the applicant withheld information, but the Board noted the defendant also possessed relevant records and failed to fully develop the record. Furthermore, the Board ruled that its prior decision was an interim procedural order, not a final one subject to reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerMedical OpinionCausal RelationshipIntervening EventsSubstantial EvidenceFurther ProceedingsLabor CodeInterlocutory Order
References
2
Case No. 06-01-00090-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 15, 2002

Nancy Renee Wright v. State of Texas

Nancy R. Wright pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine after her punishment range was enhanced by two prior felony convictions, resulting in a five-year imprisonment sentence. On appeal, Wright argued the trial court erred by interrupting her voir dire and commenting on her prior criminal record, which she contended led her to plead guilty instead of not guilty. The appellate court found that Wright failed to preserve the issue for review because she did not object to the trial court's statements during the trial. Therefore, the judgment was affirmed.

Criminal AppealDrug PossessionFelony EnhancementJury Voir DireJudicial CommentPreservation of ErrorAppellate JurisdictionDue ProcessSentencing GuidelinesTexas Law
References
6
Case No. ADJ1 149112 (VNO 0348507) ADJ3447806 (VNO 0382613)
Regular
Oct 23, 2015

Debra Fraley vs. Santa Clarita Health Care Association, CIGA by its servicing facility, Broadspire, for Superior Pacific Casualty Company in liquidation

This case involves a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a prior denial of their petition. The lien claimant argued the Appeals Board erred in finding they misrepresented the contents of a Stipulations with Request for Award because the defendant failed to serve the Lien Affidavit with the Amended Award. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the lien claimant was in possession of both the Stipulations and the Lien Affidavit prior to the Amended Award. Even if service was deficient, the lien claimant had other recourse and failed to articulate sufficient legal or factual grounds for reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationAmended AwardStipulations with Request for AwardLien AffidavitAttorneys' FeesMisrepresentationService of Documents
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2002

Claim of Ostuni v. Town of Ramapo

Claimant appealed from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed July 22, 2002, which denied her application for reconsideration and/or full Board review of a prior decision. The prior decision had ruled that claimant did not sustain a work-related injury, citing insufficient credible evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's denial, finding that the Board fully considered all evidence and no new, previously unavailable evidence was offered to warrant altering its decision. Furthermore, the court found substantial evidence supported the Board’s September 2001 decision that claimant’s injuries were not compensable, as her recurring lower back pain stemmed from injuries predating or following the alleged November 1990 incident, rather than the incident itself. The court also upheld the Board's rejection of contrary testimony as not credible.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryWork-Related InjuryReconsiderationBoard ReviewAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionArbitrary and CapriciousSubstantial EvidenceMedical Testimony
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Good v. Town of Brutus

A claimant, employed as a court clerk since 2002, developed carpal tunnel syndrome and filed a workers’ compensation claim in 2007, which was established as an occupational disease. She was awarded a 25% schedule loss of use of the left hand. The employer’s workers’ compensation carrier sought apportionment of liability with her two most recent prior employers under Workers’ Compensation Law § 44. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board denied this request, finding no medical evidence of the condition arising from prior employment. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s determination, stating that despite the claimant experiencing symptoms previously and an independent medical examiner suggesting apportionment, there was no objective medical proof that she contracted the condition while working for a previous employer. The court emphasized that the focus for apportionment is whether the claimant contracted the occupational disease during that specific employment.

Occupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeApportionment of LiabilityWorkers' Compensation Law § 44Prior EmployersMedical EvidenceIndependent Medical ExaminerSchedule Loss of UseWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate Review
References
3
Case No. ADJ7109517
Regular
May 05, 2011

DWAYNE RUDD vs. OAKLAND RAIDERS AND ACE/USA, Administered by ESIS, TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by NOVA PRO RISK SOLUTIONS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse a prior decision and found applicant Dwayne Rudd's claim barred by the statute of limitations. Despite the WCJ finding defendants estopped to assert the defense due to notice violations, the Board determined Rudd possessed actual knowledge of his workers' compensation rights. This knowledge was evidenced by his signing of a DWC-1 form and retaining multiple law firms to pursue prior, dismissed claims for the same cumulative trauma injury. Therefore, the Board concluded there was no prejudice from the lack of notice, and the claim was untimely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDwayne RuddOakland RaidersACE/USATampa Bay BuccaneersNova Pro Risk Solutionsindustrial cumulative traumaprofessional football playerstatute of limitationsestoppel
References
4
Case No. ADJ10640336
Regular
Jul 30, 2018

Refugio Gonzalez vs. Swift Transportation, Gallagher Bassett

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend a prior finding, extending the applicant's cumulative psychiatric injury date to her termination on October 7, 2016. The Board affirmed the finding of industrial injury, clarifying that Labor Code section 3208.3(e) applies, not general post-termination provisions, and that the applicant's prior medical treatment satisfied an exception. Furthermore, the Board found that the employer failed to prove the termination was a good faith personnel action, as the investigation into alleged alcohol possession was not objectively reasonable given a negative test and a disgruntled accuser.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardpsychiatric injurycumulative injurypost-termination defensegood faith personnel actionLabor Code section 3208.3(e)notice of terminationobjective reasonablenesscausationdate of injury
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 8,827 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